The Darwin Spin Off

[Madelaine McMasters]

11 minutes ago, Gabriele Graves said:

This is the second time you have said something this.  I doubt that we are that similar because I have an intense dislike for all religions, I do not believe in a God and I don't hedge my bets in case I am wrong.  I am happy to take whatever consequences there are for what I do not believe in.  I just see a design and a creation before me, I know not from whence nor where it came but I cannot deny it exists.  If I am offered absolute proof that it cannot be by design then I would accept that, until then, let my imagination hold sway.

Dad was not fond of organized religion either. He looked Buddhist to me. I have a pretty intense dislike of religion and belief in the paranormal, see no reason to believe in a god and similarly won't be hedging my bets.

Though I feel a connectedness to the universe and marvel at the way it all works, I'm content to think those are just feelings, like others I have that I've proven wrong to my satisfaction. I feel plenty of awe, and have no idea who to thank.

Edited March 15, 2021 by Madelaine McMasters

[Maryanne Solo]

With the greatest respect to all. (you know I post mostly BS & so it shall be).
Allow me to quote from this most hallowed & revered of historical texts,

"Oh my Jesus, Oh my Jesus, Oh my Jesus... Oh my JESUS." ❤️

Robert Plant, Physical Graffiti, In My Time Of Dying - 1975. 😇

[Gabriele Graves]

2 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

I'm content to think those are just feelings, like others I have that I've proven wrong to my satisfaction.

Then this is where you do hold a belief and it is contrary to mine.

[Madelaine McMasters]

3 minutes ago, Gabriele Graves said:

Then this is where you do hold a belief and it is contrary to mine.

Do you think that difference has a practical implication?

[Gabriele Graves]

4 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

Do you think that difference has a practical implication?

What bearing does the price of unicorns have in this matter?

[FairreLilette]

I don't think love could have evolved out of nothing.  If love evolved out of nothing or an amoeba, than the matter of the universe would have to have loving elements in it somewhere.  Also, I don't believe in the Big Bang theory.  Matter is too much the same.  With matter being so much the same, there would be a million and one other Earth's and counting by now because the universe bangs around all the time.  

....Waits for a certain forum member to react with a laugh to this post.  

Edited March 15, 2021 by FairreLilette

[Mollymews]

1 minute ago, FairreLilette said:

....Waits for a certain forum member to react with a laugh to this post.  

look on the sunny side

get one more reputation point than yesterday. I have heaps. I would be way under 5000 otherwise

😺

[Drayke Newall]

3 hours ago, Talligurl said:

I have concluded no one cares why other people think the way they do, everyone just wants to shout thier own opinion and ignore the thoughts that lead other to belive different things. No one ever said that you have to accept what others believe if you understand why they believe it. I have no desire to be part of a shouting match, so I will leave the rest of you to it.

I in no way think any less of a person for what they believe. I also believe that people have the right to believe what they want. That however doesn't mean that discussion, debate, argument etc can't be had where opinions and thoughts differ. It is from those very same discussions that many of the theological insights or inspiration comes about.

It is also through such discussion that many religions improve themselves and move away from bad teaching etc. Discussions that, old beliefs such as early Methodist and Apostolic churches stating (and others), 'worldly' things like no jewellery to be worn or women are not allowed to wear pants or you cant go to the theatre, dance, drink etc have forced changed.

No one is suggesting that you believing the way you do is wrong. If you believe that the bible is inspired who are we to tell you otherwise, we can only offer our side of the coin and debate pros and cons to edify ourselves.

I, on the other hand, believe the bible to be a guide (like many other religious texts) on how to live your life and amongst that guide is also a history of cultures and their practices at the time that are now irrelevant. That is my opinion and belief until someone shows me otherwise.

This is also why I don't myself, believe the bible to be the inspired word of God considering what is written in it. I believe, if it is inspired then everything written in it has to be an acknowledgement from God that everything in it is acceptable. It's akin to a person dictating a letter and someone else writing it. As some do to get around that; suggesting that only some parts are inspired by God opens up for interpretation as to which parts are inspired and this as history shows results in schisms within the religion and further compounds the issue of interpretation from long established fundamentals.

Both views, in my opinion have a high probability of leading to fanaticism and is where we get burning at the stake, witch hunts crusades, terrorism etc all because text is determined to be of God (inspired) and therefore atrocities are justified by quoting scripture (from any religion).

But all that is just my opinion and my previous posts have just been expressing that opinion which has allowed me to see science and religion as not too dissimilar.

[Madelaine McMasters]

2 hours ago, Gabriele Graves said:

What bearing does the price of unicorns have in this matter?

That depends on which of us believes in unicorns.

[Akane Nacht]

CONTACT - Science VS God Discussion - YouTube

 

Edited March 15, 2021 by Akane Nacht
fixed my paste

[BelindaN]

In the end, the only thing which truly matters in terms of personal belief and understanding is an open mind.

Open minds drive science and discovery. I try to understand what I don't understand and accept that I will never truly know everything.

Closed minds have certainty based on today. I'm a long way from certainty.

[Talligurl]

6 hours ago, Drayke Newall said:

 

But all that is just my opinion and my previous posts have just been expressing that opinion which has allowed me to see science and religion as not too dissimilar.

I have on several occasions attemted to give insight into the reasons behind commonly held opinions, sometimes these are opinions I do not hold, but people close to me that I know well hold.  Each time I get laughed at and attacked, this leads me to the conclusion that mo one really cares to try to understand the people they disagree with. 

[Luna Bliss]

47 minutes ago, Talligurl said:

I have on several occasions attemted to give insight into the reasons behind commonly held opinions, sometimes these are opinions I do not hold, but people close to me that I know well hold.  Each time I get laughed at and attacked, this leads me to the conclusion that mo one really cares to try to understand the people they disagree with. 

I think many posting on this thread already understand the mindset of a religious fundamentalist, so not sure why you feel the need to educate us on it.

When I disagree with the mindset of a fundamentalist it is not because I don't care to try and understand people I disagree with, as you claim -- the reason is because their mindset harms people and so I feel a need to confront their mindset to protect others who are victimized by it.

Perhaps you don't understand how their mindset harms others?

[Luna Bliss]

12 hours ago, Ceka Cianci said:

That was an example for Anything seen with our eyes..

I've seen plenty of car accidents.. some where there was no doubt about who's fault it was and some where They happened so fast that it was hard to tell.. 

If I'm not sure,then I'll say I'm not sure. But if i am positive about what happend, you can bet It's stuck and i know what i seen.

Now if someone edits a video to change It's context and i go and find the full version and see the true context. Then I'm also gonna know what i seen. 

My original point was that was happening on both sides, as well as algorithms don't just hand pick one side. Everyone has to deal with them.

I totally agree that news sources often slant the news towards their bias (both on the 'left' and the 'right'), and I have indeed seen that with my own eyes. Usually it's a convenient omission left out of the story which would cause us to see the issue in a whole new light.

However, I don't know why you brought this fact up in the context of what we're discussing, as it was not really a 'left' vs 'right' issue -- it was a 'me confronting those who do not know science' issue. I do believe there are more people on the 'right' today who diss Science, and have come up with their own so-called "science" in an attempt to bolster their Biblical Literalism beliefs, yes. Can you tell me why you feel compelled to give them a "side" when they don't adhere to the rules of Science?

[Arielle Popstar]

4 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

I think many posting on this thread already understand the mindset of a religious fundamentalist, so not sure why you feel the need to educate us on it.

When I disagree with the mindset of a fundamentalist it is not because I don't care to try and understand people I disagree with, as you claim -- the reason is because their mindset harms people and so I feel a need to confront their mindset to protect others who are victimized by it.

Perhaps you don't understand how their mindset harms others?

Personally I think it is interesting how when a Christian fundamentalist gives up christianity, they think they  are magically healed of their fundamentalism. They aren't. It is still there but they just become a fundamentalist about their substitute "god". Fundamentalism is a mindset with interchangeable obsessions.

Quote

Perhaps you don't understand how their mindset harms others?

Considering you see anyone who espouses any degree of Christianity to be a fundamentalist, I must be on your list. I been waiting to see you actually post what in your opinion is the harm done to others by Christians so please share what you see and then maybe we can discuss it on another thread.

[Luna Bliss]

5 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

22 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

I think many posting on this thread already understand the mindset of a religious fundamentalist, so not sure why you feel the need to educate us on it.

When I disagree with the mindset of a fundamentalist it is not because I don't care to try and understand people I disagree with, as you claim -- the reason is because their mindset harms people and so I feel a need to confront their mindset to protect others who are victimized by it.

Perhaps you don't understand how their mindset harms others?

Expand  

Personally I think it is interesting how when a Christian fundamentalist gives up christianity, they think they  are magically healed of their fundamentalism. They aren't. It is still there but they just become a fundamentalist about their substitute "god". Fundamentalism is a mindset with interchangeable obsessions.

Totally agree with your statement here -- fundamentalism is a mind trait and can be applied to any religion. But we are, in this thread started by the OP, referring to Creationists/Intelligent Design proponents related to Christianity, and so why do you make this differentiation?

[Arielle Popstar]

3 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

Totally agree with your statement here -- fundamentalism is a mind trait and can be applied to any religion. But we are, in this thread started by the OP, referring to Creationists/Intelligent Design proponents related to Christianity, and so why do you make this differentiation?

I just scanned the OP again and fail to see any references to Creationists/Intelligent Design. Perhaps Madeleine has a point about how we can get stuck in a loop and see things that aren't there when we expect or want them to be.

[Luna Bliss]

29 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Quote

Perhaps you don't understand how their mindset harms others?

Considering you see anyone who espouses any degree of Christianity to be a fundamentalist, I must be on your list. I been waiting to see you actually post what in your opinion is the harm done to others by Christians so please share what you see and then maybe we can discuss it on another thread.

Where have I ever said I believe that anyone who espouses any degree of Christianity is a fundamentalist?  Projection much? I can't count the number of times I've mentioned the "God Is Love" from the Bible, and even posted an entire song by Joni Mitchell from Corinthians which describes what love is. And following is a photo of my altar...notice Christ is 3rd from the left.

And sure, I could go on for pages and pages about the harm caused by fundamentalists due to their belief that Christianity is the only 'one true way' and so society must conform to their world view. You can begin by watching the video I posted above named "And The Bible Tells Me So", where a lesbian commits suicide by hanging herself with a dog collar because her mother was hell-bent on shaming her.

Edited March 15, 2021 by Luna Bliss

[Luna Bliss]

10 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

18 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

Totally agree with your statement here -- fundamentalism is a mind trait and can be applied to any religion. But we are, in this thread started by the OP, referring to Creationists/Intelligent Design proponents related to Christianity, and so why do you make this differentiation?

I just scanned the OP again and fail to see any references to Creationists/Intelligent Design. Perhaps Madeleine has a point about how we can get stuck in a loop and see things that aren't there when we expect or want them to be.

Give me a break!  Who do you think is obsessed with disproving Darwin and evolution? Look it up -- it's the Creationist/Intelligent Design proponents who generally claim a hotline to God via their fundamentalist Christian beliefs. They believe if they can disprove Darwin/evolution then it proves God created the world, hence the OP's statement early on that she believes (an obvious projection) the Scientists want to prove evolution so they won't have to "answer to God".

Edited March 15, 2021 by Luna Bliss

[FairreLilette]

8 hours ago, Drayke Newall said:

It is also through such discussion that many religions improve themselves and move away from bad teaching etc. Discussions that, old beliefs such as early Methodist and Apostolic churches stating (and others), 'worldly' things like no jewellery to be worn or women are not allowed to wear pants or you cant go to the theatre, dance, drink etc have forced changed.

Yes, the New Testament, through The Epistles of Paul, after Christ was crucified, have a lot of things people are supposed to do.  Women must have their heads covered while praying for one and a man must have his head uncovered while praying.  There are loads and loads of them that the churches of today do not follow while preaching to other's they must follow what scripture says.  It's called "cherry-picking" and it's a bit "off" to say the least.  If they are going to change stuff, they should update the Bible though because they teach this sola called sola scriptura for Evangelical protestants as one of the five solas one must follow.  

8 hours ago, Drayke Newall said:

that guide is also a history of cultures and their practices at the time that are now irrelevant. That is my opinion and belief until someone shows me otherwise.

I googled something yesterday, can't remember now what exactly, but I came upon a scripture that specifically said the antichrist is now by the Apostles.  I was going to post it here but didn't think it specifically relevant other than to show it was speaking about something that was occurring right now and then in regards to an "antichrist" which seems far more logical than the other stuff that's written about the antichrist.  However, no one please go off on the antichrist.  I am not discussing the antichrist but rather something that was meant for then time not all time.  

[Love Zhaoying]

11 hours ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

I'm curious, and that makes it hard not to feel sorry for the omniscient, who never feel the joy of learning. What gets them up in the morning?

I hope you mean that figuratively, omniscient folk don't need much sleep.

[Luna Bliss]

The path I am on..
When we become so attached to the external, including the mind concepts created by our human brain, we can miss out on the heartfelt YES that created the world and lies within us.
I love this short chant written by Yogananda, named 'Where Is There Love?' So where is this love? First you must relinquish attachments and know the love you seek is not "out there"... (be it through material attachments or maintaining an attachment to a cherished concept, including our notion of what the Universe or God actually is). You must have a longing to go deeper.

 

[Drayke Newall]

2 hours ago, Talligurl said:

I have on several occasions attemted to give insight into the reasons behind commonly held opinions, sometimes these are opinions I do not hold, but people close to me that I know well hold.  Each time I get laughed at and attacked, this leads me to the conclusion that mo one really cares to try to understand the people they disagree with. 

Sorry to hear that and if my posts in anyway did as such I apologise. I tried to keep it civil in responding in a manner of debate by providing examples of why I disagreed. Never meant any of the posts to come across as not caring to understand.

I understand most points of view very well when talking about Christianity. I grew up with it, as did my mother, grandmother/father, great grandmother/father etc. I was barred from going to the movies, drinking, smoking, socialising in clubs all of that due to certain beliefs held by them based on what I believe is a flawed interpretation of the bible. The reason I mentioned the whole Methodist and Apostolic rules etc was due to hearing first hand from my grandmother her experiences and living the life personally as a kid not because it was still taught that way but because for generations my family was bought up that way.

27 minutes ago, FairreLilette said:

Yes, the New Testament, through The Epistles of Paul, after Christ was crucified, have a lot of things people are supposed to do.  Women must have their heads covered while praying for one and a man must have his head uncovered while praying.  There are loads and loads of them that the churches of today do not follow while preaching to other's they must follow what scripture says.  It's called "cherry-picking" and it's a bit "off" to say the least.  If they are going to change stuff, they should update the Bible though because they teach this sola called sola scriptura for Evangelical protestants as one of the five solas one must follow.  

I think there was a difference back then than what happens now. Cherry picking is more common now where people pick a verse to suit their needs at the time in argument or belief irrespective if it is used in or out of context. Back in the early Methodist and Apostolic days it was more of a literal translation and refusing to live to a worldly standard.

The reason for example as to not drinking, smoking etc wasn't so much due to a verse specifically say as such (there is no such verse) but was more in the sense that the body is the temple of the holy spirit and therefore 'damaging' it is wrong. With regards to dancing, theatres etc., that was from a translation of the verse "Be in the world, but not of the world". The women wearing pants was due to cross dressing etc. 

To give you an idea on how ingrained it became in a persons mind even if they still didn't believe many such things after leaving. My grandmothers last words to my mother was when my mother and teenage sister were visiting her in her final moments was "why do you dress her in pants" referring to my sister.

Such denominations sill believed that grace overwrote the law of the old testament but also believed that some of those laws held true due to such things mentioned above.

Such reasonings aren't cherry picking but come down to interpretation and I suppose in a sense personal inspirations. Whilst I don't have a problem with most of that, I draw the line at fanaticism or where beliefs due to wrong interpretation or context begin to cause harm.

Edited March 15, 2021 by Drayke Newall

[Arielle Popstar]

5 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

Give me a break!  Who do you think is obsessed with disproving Darwin and evolution? Look it up -- it's the Creationist/Intelligent Design proponents who generally claim a hotline to God via their fundamentalist Christian beliefs. They believe if they can disprove Darwin/evolution then it proves God created the world, hence the OP's statement early on that she believes (an obvious projection) the Scientists want to prove evolution so they won't have to "answer to God".

Well to be exact she did say  "a god one has to answer to". A good Fundamentalist would not usually be quite so sloppy as to use a small g. But I am splitting hairs there  As far as Christian Fundamentalists are concerned, when I searched for numbers of them it struck me they were quite a small minority these days in the USA so I do wonder why you spend such an inordinate amount of time and emotional energy calling them out. As far as guilt and shaming other people's lifestyle choices is concerned, one does not have to be a Christian to indulge in that sort of behaviour.

The way you go on, you seem to think only atheistic scientists are allowed to have an opinion, and opinions they are because after 150 years of Darwinism there are still major gaps and always will be in the theory. If we were to really go on about the harms done for those pro and con about Darwinism, let me point out how Darwinism has led to an increase for biological racism because of evolutionary theory. You want to add up the deaths that have been caused by that over the 20th Century alone? We would do well to be able to trash that theory as I really do not see where it has benefitted mankind or made him more loving or forgiving. If anything the survival of the fittest and natural selection with no god to answer to, has allowed regimes to justify genocides of its own and others populations so that we have more dead in the last century then the previous 6000 years combined.

In any case from the RSoL papers it is becoming clear that Darwinism is pretty much done with and they are scrambling for a theory that encapsulates the newer findings and sweep the old one out without anyone really noticing. Unfortunately that will mean the education system will still be teaching Darwinism for the next 50 or so years.

 

[FairreLilette]

16 minutes ago, Drayke Newall said:

They sill believed that grace overwrote the law of the old testament but also believed that some of those laws held true due to such things mentioned above.

Yes, that was covered in the scripture "everything is permissible but not everything is beneficial" speaking about the O.T. 612 or so laws of the Torah, the Jewish Kosher laws.  IOW, it became permissible to eat pork but it was considered not necessarily beneficial, for example.  

This is the scripture wherein it shows the Apostles speaking about how the antichrist is now.  They also believed it was the end and/or Jesus was going to be murdered.  

1 John 2:18 ESV / 48 helpful votes 

Children, it is the last hour, and as you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come. Therefore we know that it is the last hour.

Edited March 15, 2021 by FairreLilette