Why can’t Creationists teach an alternative? Are the ‘free thinkers’ - atheists scared of som

reply to post by Welfhard


You're being narrow....leave OT's thoughts out of it for a second...

Think ID in general....one cause of all the effects...simple

Think Evolution...serious multiple causes.....complicated

OT

Originally posted by randyvs
k well , bill maher can't stand the guy. his jokes suck . nothing funny about
the guy. imo, i've never seen a more self righteous idiot.
i mean here 's a guy who thinks he's got it all figured out.
truly a legend in his own mind.
about einstein, newton, and darwin, yes i did know that. all the smart ones.

You know Bill is a very smart man, but why does he use, shall I say, intellectually challenged, to present Chrisitanity...

also Brad Pitt, now wants NO RELIGION and gives credit to Bill for the religioisity enlightenment???

Its a shame the influence these folks have - OT's praying for um for sure!!

OT

Originally posted by Deaf Alien
reply to post by OldThinker

 

ki·ne·sics, noun....The study of nonlinguistic bodily movements, such as gestures and facial expressions, as a systematic mode of communication. After all it ain't the words, its the true meaning conveyed IN REAL TIME...

Ok, you want this person to be a spokeman for the church?

DA's not getting it.

You want someone who is very well versed in NLP? Isn't that what many famous religous leaders do?

Sighs, DA's not getting it

and DA's a little inebriated at this time.

You have your coffee? You back? Thoughts on the list of what I'd like to see in a spokesmen?

OT

reply to post by OldThinker


Yea well your opinion is hardly science. Again evolution isn't built on assumptions - every part of it (even if it is complicated) is based on the study of life (biology).

ID maybe simpler but it's not remotely representative of reality.

serious multiple causes.....complicated

No. In a deterministic reality like the one that we exist within there is only one original cause - the Big Bang. It's simple and linear but at the same time has nothing to do with Evolution - the mechanism by witch life diversifies.

ID is riddled with assumptions.

You're being narrow.

And you're not? You are admittedly biased, you don't know the science behind evolution, and you won't so much as consider alternatives. You don't even see the fact that what you believe is a myth invented by ancient Sumerian elders from other 7 thousand years ago - further back even than the very modern incarnation of that same myth says the earth went.

I used to be a fundamentalist Christian and upon reviewing the actual science involved was encouraged to check my thinking. I am now at the opposite end of the theism spectrum - hardly "narrow."

Originally posted by Welfhard
...I used to be a fundamentalist Christian ....

Me, too...

Was awful....

Good people, strange beliefs, or really "applications" of those beliefs...

Why'd you change?

OT

Originally posted by Welfhard
......I used to be a fundamentalist Christian and upon reviewing the actual science involved was encouraged to check my thinking. I am now at the opposite end of the theism spectrum ....."

This is a societal consistency, btw...

Secular progressives own higher education...and thus influence greatly...

OT

Originally posted by OldThinker

Originally posted by Deaf Alien
reply to post by OldThinker

 

ki·ne·sics, noun....The study of nonlinguistic bodily movements, such as gestures and facial expressions, as a systematic mode of communication. After all it ain't the words, its the true meaning conveyed IN REAL TIME...

Ok, you want this person to be a spokeman for the church?

DA's not getting it.

You want someone who is very well versed in NLP? Isn't that what many famous religous leaders do?

Sighs, DA's not getting it

and DA's a little inebriated at this time.

You have your coffee?

You back? Thoughts on the list of what I'd like to see in a spokesmen?

OT

Yes, I am back

Well, after you presented the definition, it seems that you'd like someone who is an expert in NLP to be a spokesman for the church.

reply to post by Deaf Alien

Good!!!!

What is NLP?

OT



[edit on 19-8-2009 by OldThinker]

reply to post by OldThinker


NLP - Neuro-linguistic programming

Neuro-linguistic programming (NLP) is defined in the Oxford English Dictionary as "a model of interpersonal communication chiefly concerned with the relationship between successful patterns of behaviour and the subjective experiences (esp. patterns of thought) underlying them" and "a system of alternative therapy based on this which seeks to educate people in self-awareness and effective communication, and to change their patterns of mental and emotional behaviour".

Wiki

reply to post by Deaf Alien



OK, thx!

I dunno?

That's alot of "technical" mombo jombo...


The church needs a confident, settled, kind, wise as a serpent, harmless as a dove leader....

I know of a few

Tony Campolo
Chuck Swindol
Bono
and maybe, Tony Evans


Even with its flaws, I think it does have a preserving effect on this world....at least I hope that.....

fat finger DPost...sorry!

[edit on 19-8-2009 by OldThinker]

Sorry for butting in... actually, no, I'm not...

I'd just like to pop in and make a few points. As I peruse this thread, I see a few points reiterated multiple times. I would like to address a few of these.

First, the scientists with faith being outcast. This is not entirely true, though it may have occurred on a few occasions, there are still many well established scientists who have faith and who do not hide the fact. I'd be willing to bet that those who were "cast out for their faith" most likely had other issues. Many scientists have faith, how better to become closer to God than to learn all you can about His creation?

Second, Sir Isaac Newton, et. al. Although Old Sir Ike was devout and deeply spiritual, he could be differentiated from modern creationists on one very important point. He did not let his faith effect his science. If it didn't stand up under the scrutiny of the scientific method, it wasn't science. He had no tolerance for laziness or sloppy workmanship, and no patience for those who could not think critically. He would have been mortified at the idea of learning science as doctrine from a priest.

Third, for those of faith, there is rightly a flow of information, and it is this: The world informs the senses, the senses inform the mind, the mind informs science, science informs faith. Thus, science is meant to be used to explain the bible, not the other way around. It should teach you to understand creation, doing it backwards only teaches regurgitation.

Well, that's all for now.
-PsychoHazard

reply to post by OldThinker

Me, too...

Was awful....

Good people, strange beliefs, or really "applications" of those beliefs...

Why'd you change?

Because I learnt about Ancient Egypt and Summer.
It became instantly apparent that the OT was a book of fairy tales with no basis in reality. From there is was a gradual distancing from theism.

Bible isn't inerrant.
Jesus wasn't of God.
God's not a personal God.
No afterlife.
[Probably] No God.

I'm not narrow. Far from it.

Secular progressives own higher education...and thus influence greatly...

And as education becomes more readily available, society secularizes and atheism becomes more common as indoctrination goes away.

"God is dead."
- Nietzsche

[edit on 19-8-2009 by Welfhard]

Originally posted by PsychoHazard
... The world informs the senses, the senses inform the mind, the mind informs science, science informs faith. Thus, science is meant to be used to explain the bible, not the other way around. It should teach you to understand creation, doing it backwards only teaches regurgitation.

You are always welcome, but your sequence may be backwards, at times….? What about when the Psalms were written? Was it after ‘Science’ discovered…that the earth was round? I don’t think so..? Was it after ‘Science’ discovered…that the universe is expanding?
I don’t know…maybe…possibly…Isaiah could have had access to MyFly’s Dilourion (sp?) and jumped ahead in time…probably saw John Titor, had lunch, Italian, I think…and then secretly peeked at the Journal of Modern Science…took some notes…went back to Biblical times, wrote it down and was promoted to Old Testament Author?????

Skeptic, certainly this is mathematically possible….with enough TIME and CHANCE, right? Well, let’s see what he wrote, ok?

He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in. - Isaiah 40:22

He wraps himself in light as with a garment; he stretches out the heavens like a tent and lays the beams of his upper chambers on their waters. He makes the clouds his chariot and rides on the wings of the wind. - Psalms 104:2-3

This is what God the Lord says — he who created the heavens and stretched them out, who spread out the earth and all that comes out of it, who gives breath to its people, and life to those who walk on it. - Isaiah 42:5

The Lord speaking: "It is I who made the earth and created mankind upon it. My own hands stretched out the heavens; I marshaled their starry hosts." - Isaiah 45:12

WoW! He knew the earth was round and the universe is expanding! Gee wise! Certainly JOB had access to a telescope…He must have…right….because he claimed…that the Earth is suspended in emptiness, or space, which Job describes as "nothing." Chapter 26:7 says, "He spreads out the northern [skies] over empty space; he suspends the earth over nothing." NEXT>>>

What about THE HYDROLOGIC CYCLE? OT, what does that mean? I don’t know…I’m thirsty, got to get a drink of water…I’ll be right back??? Water, huh? That’s it! en.wikipedia.org...

It’s all in the GOOD BOOK, folks!!! Who would a thunk it? Even the sphericity stuff too! Whew, this is a neat book!

"He draws up the drops of water, which distill as rain to the streams; the clouds pour down their moisture and abundant showers fall on mankind." - Job 36:27-28 "He wraps up the waters in his clouds, yet the clouds do not burst under their weight." - Job 26:8 The wind blows to the south and turns to the north; round and round it goes, ever returning on its course. All streams flow into the sea, yet the sea is never full. To the place the streams come from, there they return again. - Ecclesiastes 1:6-7

“Hey did you know Moses went to Oxford? Really, must have…he knew that the future fossil record prove plants were around before animals…”
“Really! That’s amazing OT!” “ Ah, not me…I read it somewhere…"Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds." And it was so. - Genesis 1:11

And God said, "Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the sky." - Genesis 1:20 And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind." And it was so. - Genesis 1:24 NEXT>>>>>

“OT, I thought the Bible was disproved by science?” “Yeah, I’ve heard that myth a few times, did you know the Bible agrees with science…it too says…that the first life appeared in the water…just like science………………….And God said, "Let the water teem with living creatures..." - Genesis 1:20

On the clearest night possible…with the naked eye…go out…better yet go atop the highest mountain near you…on the clearest night…and count…count the stars…I bet you can count a lot…but not an infinite amount…you will come up with a number, for sure…

Yet…the Bible spoke a scientific fact…may many years before we had telescopes…that the number of stars is endless…or at least a whole bunch more than we can count readily…correct? Another one of those old ‘scientists’ named Jeremiah said…"I will make the descendants of David my servant and the Levites who minister before me as countless as the stars of the sky and as measureless as the sand on the seashore.'"

Also Charlton Heston, I mean MOSES said of the LORD to Abraham…"I will surely bless you and make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and as the sand on the seashore. Your descendants will take possession of the cities of their enemies,"

My man, Jacob "But you have said, 'I will surely make you prosper and will make your descendants like the sand of the sea, which cannot be counted.'" in Genesis 32… also in Gen 15…”He took him outside and said, "Look up at the heavens and count the stars—if indeed you can count them." Then he said to him, "So shall your offspring be."

Also what about the old dudes speaking of "valleys" existing beneath the sea? Thousands and thousands of years ago?? How could they have known of this…satellites maybe? Probably not too probable, huh?
See…”The valleys of the sea were exposed and the foundations of the earth laid bare at the rebuke of the Lord, at the blast of breath from his nostrils. - 2 Samuel 22:16 Oh, I see they were seismic experts?

reply to post by OldThinker


After reading a wiki entry on Tony Campolo, I thought he was a pretty liberal pastor until I read this quote from him:

Tony Campolo and his wife Peggy have participated in very public debates and discussions about the place of lesbians and gays within church and society. Tony Campolo contends that homosexuality is a sin in practice, though not in orientation.

en.wikipedia.org...

Not a good choice

Not much on this person Chuck Swindoll.

On Bono, I am with you

I do not know their standing on Creationism and it's teaching in classroom.

Originally posted by Welfhard
reply to post by OldThinker

 

Me, too...

Was awful....

Good people, strange beliefs, or really "applications" of those beliefs...

Why'd you change?

Because I learnt about Ancient Egypt and Summer.
It became instantly apparent that the OT was a book of fairy tales with no basis in reality. From there is was a gradual distancing from theism.
Bible isn't inerrant.
Jesus wasn't of God.
God's not a personal God.
No afterlife.
[Probably] No God.

I'm not narrow. Far from it.

Appreciate your transparency there....

OT

THX!

reply to post by PsychoHazard


In the OP if I have not misunderstood, the OP is stating that we should give scientists' beliefs a closer look since they have discovered scientific laws and such.

Some scientists support Creationism. Does that mean it should be taught in the classroom?

reply to post by Welfhard

Bible isn't inerrant.

True

Jesus wasn't of God.

That is disputable. It's all about the definition. After all, didn't Jesus say that we were all gods?

God's not a personal God.

Yeah, probably an impersonal God.

No afterlife.

Now that is your opinion. There are plenty of evidence supporting afterlife.

[Probably] No God.

Maybe. Maybe not.

reply to post by Deaf Alien

That is disputable. It's all about the definition. After all, didn't Jesus say that we were all gods?

I have no idea what he said. Not only do the accounts disagree, his character clearly borrows on older mythical figures.

Yeah, probably an impersonal God.

I look around and if their is a god, the most sensible explanation is that he just doesn't give a sh%#.

ow that is your opinion. There are plenty of evidence supporting afterlife.

I hope you're not talking about NED's and that rubbish cos it's not evidence of anything. Otherwise the secular world would be interested in this "evidence" you have.

Maybe. Maybe not.

Hence "Probably".

reply to post by Welfhard

I hope you're not talking about NED's and that rubbish cos it's not evidence of anything. Otherwise the secular world would be interested in this "evidence" you have.

You mean NDEs. Yes there are evidence for that. Actually some skeptics are interested in it. But that's for another thread. There is a good thread on it by Skyfloating.