- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: An article many of you need to read
Posted on 5/18/20 at 5:38 pm to troyt37
Posted on 5/18/20 at 5:38 pm to troyt37
quote:
You aren't understanding the concept. You don't have to be competent or a criminal mastermind if you have power, powerful friends, powerful friends in the right places, or knowledge of where your opponents bodies are buried.
I don't know...It may be possible to be a bumbling fool and out think and out guess others but it doesn't seem logical...to acquire power requires some thinking...even those born into those circles are relegated to the periphery if they are moronic. To have powerful friends one must bring something to the equation...again, being a fool doesn't seem to help here as it is a pretty common trait and knowledge of where the bodies are buried requires knowledge. It is a different kind of smart than most people have but it takes a smart person to get elected and stay elected and in a position of influence and power because you will have to constantly best your enemies and those bent on taking your power.
0
Posted on 5/18/20 at 7:38 pm to Mr. Misanthrope
quote:
...the evidence and eyewitness testimony support your general summary characterization.
In a thread that deals with critical thinking and credulity, I hate to break it to you that if you believe there's evidence and contemporary accounts of Jesus doing any of the things referenced in Roger's post, you might be struggling with both, at least where Christianity is concerned.
Hell, I'll be extra generous and pretend that contemporary eyewitness accounts of the miracles Jesus supposedly performed actually exist and were documented at the time of their supposed occurrence. That doesn't for a moment prove that Jesus was the son of God, that he rose from the dead and ascended to heaven or that he was the son of God/God incarnate.
Posted on 5/18/20 at 8:49 pm to nematocyte
quote:Perhaps, my friend, I've been unclear or, possibly, you've misread the texts.
In a thread that deals with critical thinking and credulity, I hate to break it to you that if you believe there's evidence and contemporary accounts of Jesus doing any of the things referenced in Roger's post, you might be struggling with both, at least where Christianity is concerned.
The OP, salty1, wrote he thought
the two Evangelicals' editorial arguing against Christians accepting verbal claims (of conspiracies) "interesting". I agree, particularly when in the same editorial the authors seem to simultaneously argue the claims of MSM be given greater face value credibility.
Unfortunately, apparently unable to miss taking a swipe at Christianity, your friend suggested a comparison of conspiracies. He wrote he believes some conspiracies-probably true/all religions-probably false; narrowing his comparisons, he wrote 9-11, most certainly true/Christianity, most certainly, false, foolish, insupportable? My question there indicates I don't want to narrowly misrepresent his point but state it as it came across in general.
I simply suggested to him that he lay the two "conspiracies", 9-11 and the general summary of Christianity he presented, side by side, marshal the evidence fairly, and come to some conclusions.
quote:
Hell, I'll be extra generous and pretend that contemporary eyewitness accounts of the miracles Jesus supposedly performed actually exist and were documented at the time of their supposed occurrence. That doesn't for a moment prove that Jesus was the son of God, that he rose from the dead and ascended to heaven or that he was the son of God/God incarnate.
I certainly appreciate your generosity. Of course the evidence you deny exists, it's credible, it's available, and does exactly prove those things you zealously and faithfully deny.
Posted on 5/18/20 at 9:32 pm to Mr. Misanthrope
quote:
I certainly appreciate your generosity. Of course the evidence you deny exists, it's credible, it's available, and does exactly prove those things you zealously and faithfully deny.
My pleasure! Let me know when that credible evidence proving Jesus was a supernatural being comes to light, would love to take a look.
Posted on 5/19/20 at 10:20 am to nematocyte
quote:
My pleasure! Let me know when that credible evidence proving Jesus was a supernatural being comes to light, would love to take a look.
Seek and ye shall find.
Edit: Not wishing to come across as supercilious and cavalier perhaps I could suggest that you examine the New Testament documents giving them the same treatment that other ancient texts receive.
To that end I think a local guy, Brant Pitre's The Case For Jesus is a well rounded and reasoned look at biblical and historical evidence supporting Christianity. He is a Roman Catholic (I am not) but his case is not overly influenced or weakened by that in the least nor is his work primarily for scholars.
To that I would strongly consider N.T. Wright's The New Testament And The People Of God and Jesus And The Victory Of God. Wright is an Anglican (as am I) and makes similar points as Pitre's but is a bit more scholarly and, perhaps, beats the first century Judaism drum a bit hard. Both authors have abundant bibliographies and you should be on your way.
Best wishes and happy learning.
This post was edited on 5/19/20 at 10:49 am
Posted on 5/19/20 at 10:51 am to nematocyte
quote:
My pleasure! Let me know when that credible evidence proving Jesus was a supernatural being comes to light, would love to take a look.
Isn't that special? How about you provide some credible evidence proving how life on earth began? Surely science has tested, and repeated the exact process for creating the first living thing on earth. And what exactly was that first living organism? No supposition, postulates, or theories here. Credible evidence. Or is your religion faith based as well?
Posted on 5/19/20 at 3:34 pm to troyt37
quote:
Isn't that special? How about you provide some credible evidence proving how life on earth began
What in the frickity frick are you talking about, and to what religion are you referring? I never claimed to know how life began and neither has science, and that fact doesn't for a second support the god of the gaps argument you're alluding to. We have absolutely no idea how life started and though scientists won't stop trying to find the answer, even if they found a process to create primitive, self-replicating RNA molecules from a combination of pre-life chemical reactions, that wouldn't necessarily be proof of how life on Earth originated. It's likely we will never be able to definitively answer that question.
And there's nothing wrong with that, just like there's nothing wrong with admitting you don't know the answer to something. But there is something wrong with pretending to know things you cannot possibly know, a staple of almost all religions.
This post was edited on 5/19/20 at 3:35 pm
Posted on 5/19/20 at 4:16 pm to nematocyte
quote:
What in the frickity frick are you talking about, and to what religion are you referring?
I'm talking about he religion of man. Science. Evolution. Big Bang.
quote:
I never claimed to know how life began and neither has science, and that fact doesn't for a second support the god of the gaps argument you're alluding to.
Never heard of God of the gaps before, but it certainly sound apropos of evolution. It is almost impossible to read any science based literature on the origin of man and not be inundated with suppositon, postulates, asumptions, inferences, theories, and just flat out guesses, but almost never is there any ambiguity in the language explaining the origin of life. It is presented as fact. You know it, I know it. Lets not pretend otherwise.
quote:
And there's nothing wrong with that, just like there's nothing wrong with admitting you don't know the answer to something. But there is something wrong with pretending to know things you cannot possibly know, a staple of almost all religions.
That's where you are mistaken. Almost nobody I have ever discussed this with who has a science based philosophy, wasn't offended at the notion that it takes every bit as much faith to believe their way as mine. Christians aren't pretending to know things they cannot possibly know, they know things in the sense that they have faith that they happened the way it says in the Bible. Just like evolutionists have faith in the way science and man has taught them to believe.
This post was edited on 5/19/20 at 4:19 pm
Posted on 5/19/20 at 4:59 pm to Mr. Misanthrope
quote:
To that end I think a local guy, Brant Pitre's The Case For Jesus is a well rounded and reasoned look at biblical and historical evidence supporting Christianity. He is a Roman Catholic (I am not) but his case is not overly influenced or weakened by that in the least nor is his work primarily for scholars.
I went to a Southern Baptist middle and high school. Other than, obviously, the Bible, required reading included some of the more popular Christian authors, C.S. Lewis, Strobel, Josh McDowell and several more I can't remember offhand.
I was and am, in a word, unimpressed, but thank you for the suggestions. Perhaps the Christian god is real and he just grew tired of being "helpful," I can't prove otherwise, but it should raise the eyebrows of more believers that if he truly exists, if he's truly omniscient and he truly loves us and wants to "know" him, why is it that we've uncovered and continue to uncover evidence of an unfathomably massive and indifferent universe playing host to a mostly-hostile planet, located in an unremarkable, dying galaxy, where his most prized and beloved creation has evolved through extreme hardship and suffering from a branch of one of his less prized creations, which itself was a product of evolution and suffering that spanned hundreds of millions to billions of years, and why does this knowledge we've gained, which in his omniscience he knew was coming and through his creation the tools were provided, make it look precisely as if he created our cosmic laboratory to show that he doesn't exist?
Posted on 5/19/20 at 9:20 pm to troyt37
quote:
I'm talking about he religion of man. Science. Evolution. Big Bang.
Knew it was coming, hoped you wouldn't do it. I'll never understand why people who claim science is an actual religion aren't able to see that it means one of two possible things, neither of which are claims I think you want to make:
Either you're attempting to elevate religion beyond its supernatural, faith-based claims to the realm of science and empiricism, -or- you're attempting to bring science down to the level of religion and claim it's subject to the same evidentiary and reasoning problems. Now, if you want to water down religion to mean something important to someone, fine, guilty as charged, science is my religion, but you don't get to stop with the science that contradicts scripture, you can throw ANYTHING you want under that ridiculous umbrella: volcanology, cell theory, medicine, physics, astronomy, aeronautics, goat herding, dog grooming... But at the end of the day, you aren't going to find us highly religious folk deifying and praying at night to scientistics of the past, you won't find us reading the same passages from the same book every week for our entire lives while we pretend it could not have originated from anywhere but the divine, and you won't find us completely incapable of changing our minds and altering our religion of science when new, credible information comes to light.
quote:
Never heard of God of the gaps before, but it certainly sound apropos of evolution. It is almost impossible to read any science based literature on the origin of man and not be inundated with suppositon, postulates, asumptions, inferences, theories, and just flat out guesses, but almost never is there any ambiguity in the language explaining the origin of life. It is presented as fact. You know it, I know it. Lets not pretend otherwise.
You are REALLY confused here. There will *always* be gaps to fill and more to discover (for instance, we don't know which specific australopith we descended from), but evolution has already broadly answered where man came from and if the Bible got any of the most important questions that are actually subject to the scientific theory wrong, it's this one. And of course it did, there's no way a prescientific civilization could possibly know we branched off and evolved from primates millions of years ago.
Where you're confused is that evolution is about changes in species, it does not answer nor does it attempt to answer the origin of life. This question, like evolution, involves a multidisciplinary approach from science, but unlike evolution, we have hypotheses, not a working theory. I don't know what literature you're reading that claims to have a factual answer to this question but I haven't seen it and to be frank, I'm pretty sure you actually haven't, either.
quote:
That's where you are mistaken. Almost nobody I have ever discussed this with who has a science based philosophy, wasn't offended at the notion that it takes every bit as much faith to believe their way as mine. Christians aren't pretending to know things they cannot possibly know, they know things in the sense that they have faith that they happened the way it says in the Bible. Just like evolutionists have faith in the way science and man has taught them to believe.
What I bolded is, quite literally, the very definition of pretending to know something you cannot know. I don't want to spend too much time discussing how watering down definitions doesn't make your claim true, I touched on it already with "religion," and how context matters (having faith that the sun will rise tomorrow isn't exactly the same as having faith that we have souls which depart our dead bodies and survive eternally, is it?), but this idea I've unfortunately seen from far too many Christians that equates their faith that their holy book, replete with everything from divine malevolence, historical inaccuracies and self-contradictions, was divinely authored through man in the arse backwards Middle East thousands of years ago and through which by faith in its NT claims is the ONLY way humans can escape the eternal punishment created by that very same loving creator, is somehow equivalent to the "faith" we have in the mountains of paleontological, anthropological, biological, et al. evidence of evolution, is beyond absurd.
The ONLY "faith" anyone needs to have on board when reviewing that mountain of evidence and accepting the FACT of evolution is the faith that a supreme creator didn't intentionally plant all of the evidence to trick its creation into accepting the trickery as fact. If that makes me a man of faith in your eyes, so be it, we can debate on what you believe is equal footing.
This post was edited on 5/19/20 at 9:25 pm
Posted on 5/19/20 at 9:43 pm to Wtodd
Posted on 5/19/20 at 9:51 pm to salty1
and so you believe a clump of microscopic "something" appeared from nowhere, then "blew up" and we "evolved" from that "explosion" a gazillion years ago, according to people - who are less than a hundred years old - teaching that horseshite at some university, the home of college professors, the most lunatic pieces of shite on the planet
And somehow through all that, a code of "right and wrong" developed all by itself?
And somehow through all that, a code of "right and wrong" developed all by itself?
Posted on 5/19/20 at 9:52 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
Roger Klarvin
Russiagate?
Posted on 5/19/20 at 9:59 pm to nematocyte
There is zero empirical evidence proving neo Darwinism happened. Has more hole in it than Swiss cheese. Like big bang theory. Micro evolution has happened tho. Big difference. Laws of thermodynamics and law of conservation of angular momentum are evidence of a creator and basically disprove the Big Bang. Look at the planets ?? and moons. Their rotation of some gives it away. Let’s see if you can guess what that is.
Page 7 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News