It sells better at the gift shop.Quote:
Originally Posted by Watchman
Unfortunately, it's not just the religious nuts that do this over here. :stwshame:
Printable View
It sells better at the gift shop.Quote:
Originally Posted by Watchman
Unfortunately, it's not just the religious nuts that do this over here. :stwshame:
That much is obvious from merely seeing import films and other popular media - despite the vetting the import publishers do - but I didn't feel like generalizing beyond the bounds of the topic. ~;p
I wish you were right BG but this reminds me of other people I have met, they hang on to one truth and then warp the whole world around it.
Maybe he is on the wind-up though.
Well we can take that as a pun on some other recent very vocal "religeous" nuts , who turned out to be pretty queer indeed:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:Quote:
Were that the case they'd have to be pretty queer to make themselves so ridiculous on a regular basis.
But lok on th bright side , Ham has slowly managed to change some of his views because even he could see that they were so ridiculous , give him time and maybe some more of his ridiculous views will fix themself .
The damn fool really should study the scriptures more though , especially the words he uses as "evidence" that are mis-translations of completely different words altogether .
But one ofmy favourites for the young earthers is about the date/time changes from the MT-LXX , because the people at the time had no record of events that had supposedly happened in their historical timeframe
Quote:
Originally Posted by Watchman
...why American religious nuts have such a fixation with turning what's supposed to be sacred and profound into cheap and vulgar is quite beyond my comprehension.
The Professor & the Midgets (Älykääpiöt) of Kummeli of the much higher, non-cheap, non-vulgar, superior Finnish media.Quote:
That much is obvious from merely seeing import films and other popular media
I am no christian. Still, the ease with which their and any religionists' tenets get bashed, derided, and generally held up to ridicule here is alarming, and disappointing.
On any other subject I see reasoned, if impassioned, debate. Religion? Red cape + Bull.
Never said our TV content didn't suck as well. But we at least have the decency to not import it in bulk. :balloon2:
Fair enough, but given that the topic is largely based on faith instead of reason...Quote:
Originally Posted by KukriKhan
The fact is, for a nonbeliever most religious tenets will come across at best as vaguely amusing, or well-meaning but slightly odd; at worst, as downright ludicrous garbage. Neither makes for a convincing basis for argument, but the believers obviously see the matter differently - which results in a bit of a communication barrier. Incompatible premises, you could say.
And being told that for example evolution didn't happen because it conflicts with someone's interpretation of a Scripture gets old pretty fast; persistence on the matter changes that to annoying and eventually downright intellectually insulting - "so I'm supposed to swallow all this just because your dusty Scripture claims it is so?"
My $0.02 for my fellow secularists:
You will never "win" a debate against a creationist by using science-based arguments. They are not valid currency. Faith in the Bible is the only legal tender as far as creationists are concerned. And this is fair enough, because we secularists are just as untrusting of their currency as they are of ours.
The only possible outcome of a secularist and a creationist arguing (at least in the Backroom) is that both of them walk away with a bad taste in their mouth.
Just as science can not disprove faith, faith can not disprove science.
I don't know if he is putting us all on or not, but there has been a lot of scorn heaped on Navaros in this thread because of his beliefs, which is a little disturbing.
The only time creationists should be scorned is when they try to force their beliefs on others.
If they are simply stating their beliefs and holding them out for discussion, then there is no need for scorn.
Have a nice day...
:beam:
Navaros is free to believe what he wants. Belief is a private matter as far as I'm concerned. But expressing it publicly exposes it to the other side of the Freedom of Expression coin - opinion and critique.
And this sort of topic is one where the naysayers have a tendency to be pretty scathing. I suspect it comes partly from a resignation to the fact the discussion won't actually go anywhere, so people just idly and sarcastically pick apart bits that cath their eye to pass the time and on general principle.
Well, I do anyway. :sweatdrop:
But people do not have to use science based arguements to slap down a muppet like Ken Hams views , that would only be fair when he foolishly tries to use science himself (which he often does in his books and on his website) , it is just as easy to use scripture to show that he is talking garbage .Quote:
You will never "win" a debate against a creationist by using science-based arguments. They are not valid currency. Faith in the Bible is the only legal tender as far as creationists are concerned.
While there are many science based arguements completely destroying any credibilty in his "science" based claims , there are just as many scripture based arguements against his claims .
As I have said before , this brand of cretinism is the realm of those who lack faith , and have little knowledge of either scripture or science .
No, decendents of primordal slime.Quote:
Originally Posted by BigTex
Try that they were parts of God's creation that went extinct.
I know, we should spend it on another of the thousands of evolutionary museums. Heck, why spend money on museums, or caffeterias, or theatres? Let's give it all to starving kids!!
That's society for ya. People like museums - if there is going to be one, it might as well be Chistian.
You know MODs, If anyone said half the things about islam or jewdeism that these members are constsantly saying about Christianity, they would be banned. I find it strange that they can discriminate against Christians as much as they like while they still can't say anything about any other religion. Please do tell me why this is.
Sorry if I ruffled any feathers - I hope I roasted them off.
Discrimination has to end on this board. I think I may start a thread in the WatchTower.
Night all
It is true that we tolerate (as in: let stand) posts with content that, if it were on a religion board, might be considered blasphemous or sacreligious by true believers. We do step in when the content is personally slanderous toward another member, per Org rules.
The alternative would be to disallow any discussion of religion at all, lest we offend some sect. Yet, we observe the fact that a religion-related topic gets started every week. The membership here wants to discuss it. So we allow it, and watch closely, without favouring one religion or non-religion over another, as much as humanly possible.
If you feel those efforts are inadequate, you are certainly within your privilege to post a complaint in Watchtower. I look forward to seeing your suggestions for improvement of religion coverage in the Backroom.
I also think that members here know a lot more about western religions (Christianity) then they do about eastern ones like Hinduisms or islam... so naturally people stick to what they know. also religions hold up beliefs as cold hard facts. If i were to say the sun orbits around a teacup, people would quite rightly tell me i am a crackpot(pun intended).
If religion is grounds to say things like homosexuals are this or that, or people who have abortions are this or that, or people who have sex before marriage are this or that. Then people have the right to question, disagree and point out things about religions.
they are a lot of intelligent people on these boards,most of the people here are adults, it would be a shame to limit what can be discussed, or to censor what is said. most people are careful to attack the points, statements or posts and not the person or religions per say'.
~:grouphug: :whip:
It is quite ironic to see the same people who are so understanding/apologetic of radical Islam every time a new article is posted on this board about some horrible muslim practice -whether its stoning women or cutting off children's hands - jump on Navoros and other Christians because they don't believe in evolution lock, stock, and barrel.
Im not particularly Christian, but the hypocrisy by some - not all - of the "seculars" in this thread is pathetic. :shame:
The only thing I've gotten out of this thread is that Navaros is claiming that Satan gave Man meat. Awesome.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redleg
All ground, the world itself and everything in it became cursed as a result of Adam's disobediance to God. Not just the Garden of Eden.
Regarding the comments about animal sacrifices: sacrifices were required because without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin. Eventually Jesus became the sacrificial lamb who shed his blood instead. If Adam, Eve and Satan had not corrupted the world then there would be no sin and no sacrifices would have been called for. Do not ask me why without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin; I'm not God so I don't know that. But it is God's law.
@Goofball's comment: That applies to evolutionists just as much. There is absolutely no possible way an evolutionist would ever come away from a debate with the thought that evolution did not happen, even if he suffered a devastating loss in that debate. The evolutionist's zealous faith in his own idea is too strong for that to ever happen.
I like all the scorn in this thread. It illustrates very well just how much zealotry is in the hearts of evolutionists, how zealously up in arms all evolutionists get at opposition to their faith in evolution. It's two sides of the same coin, although evolutionists happen to be on the incorrect side.
@The few different posters who stated that no one said the Museum should not exist: there's been plenty of people saying that in this thread. :dizzy2:
Whoa, wait a minute. Coins have incorrect sides?
What is ironic Panzer is that during your enforced absence you seem to have forgotten or missed which poster has been very vocal in supporting Muslim fundamentalism and the practices associated with it . Also with Judaic fundamentalism .Quote:
It is quite ironic to see the same people who are so understanding/apologetic of radical Islam every time a new article is posted on this board about some horrible muslim practice -whether its stoning women or cutting off children's hands - jump on Navoros and other Christians because they don't believe in evolution lock, stock, and barrel.
Im not particularly Christian, but the hypocrisy by some - not all - of the "seculars" in this thread is pathetic.
Would you like to guess who that poster is before you go off on one ?
Here have a clue ....try post #1
This must be one the few times I'll ever agree with tribesman. But you are way off with that generalization Panther. Maybe you should go back through some of the old threads before making such a bold statement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
Nav are you seriously trying to say PETA is spreading god's word? Wheat, barley and all other plants are also living creatures. Is it somehow acceptable to Yawe that we choose to murder the apple instead of killing the animals? They both are living, both created, in your theology, by Yawe yet you kill it and feel no shame?
I am aware Tribes, and Ive given my opinion on that as well.
In this particular thread, however, the intolerance of the tolerant seemed a bit more interesting than Nav's new found love for the muslims. I am certainly not rushing to his defence though - as if he needed it. :inquisitive:
Its just funny that certain people are so defensive of people like Nav when they happen to be muslim, but the same thought process doesnt apply to fundi-Christians.
Your irony is not lost on me however - game point to you for calling me on it. :boxing:
IMHO that's because the discussion on Muslim ultras nigh invariably can't see the forest behind the trees. Plus most folks here frankly aren't qualified to discuss the faith to very profound degree on account of sheer unfamiliarity with the subject - which does not keep quite a few folks from issuing rather bold and sweeping statements at near regular intervals, which to my eyes at least have a noticeable habit of stinking of raw ethnocentrism and xenophobia. The confessional questions involved have a marked tendency to get severely mixed up with sociopolitical ones, which are quite different.
Various aspects of Christianity are something most people raised in "Western" cultures very nearly cannot but be fairly familiar with (which doesn't keep people from making incorrect statements about the faith; but that tends to happen rather more rarely and with a rather less hostile tone than with Islam for some odd reason...), ergo they can actually make reasonably informed statements regarding it. Moreover the religious divisor line here does not suspiciously overlap and get mixed up with various far more secular ones.
Besides, when was the last time a Muslim zealot posted anything on these boards ? Fervent Christians do it regularly, and get duly picked on by skeptics. Other faiths are glaringly absent in this regard for some reason.
Having just skimmed through this thread, i'm faced with the question: does anyone here actually believe the [censored] the museum is passing off as fact?
Only people who already believe it presumeably. Hopefully anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by sapi
Humans worry me.
:P
All this is reminding me of a quote from some guy on the news the other day - "we're humans, not animals"
I gather he failed biology :laugh4:
Where would I find those?Quote:
Originally Posted by Vuk
Frankly that is not the translation I have heard concerning the relative passage from Genesis that I posted about the disobenence of man.Quote:
Originally Posted by Navaros
The initial poster did not exactly mince his words. This usually does not bring out the best in other posters.Quote:
Originally Posted by Navaros
Now he is a Cathar, too. :balloon2:Quote:
Originally Posted by Navaros
It must be said I can't think of any secular terrorists either.Quote:
The initial poster did not exactly mince his words. This usually does not bring out the best in other posters.
Not even sure when being secular would be relevant, or really have anything to do with creationism. You could happily be a secular Christian creationist.
Yes, the Cathars. I knew it reminded me of something. Thanks Adrian!Quote:
Originally Posted by Adrian II
According to the most recent credible polls, like the one mentioned in the article in the OP and the one linked-to on this board a few months ago, between 50% - 60% of Americans believe what the creation Museum says. Due to the existence and future popularity of the creation Museum, that number is bound to rise even more in the coming months and years. :2thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by sapi
:laugh4: I've been needing to update my sig for a while...Quote:
Originally Posted by GoreBag