User Tag List

First 5678 Last

Results 61 to 70 of 79

  1. #61
    Freaking Ratchet Rail Tracer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,041

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    I'm sorry evolutionary what? Evolutionary creationists? Is that even a thing, tell me that's not a thing and its just made up. How can that be a thing? I dont think that's a thing at all.
    To circumvent science and the Evolutionary Theory, these people purpose that God created the universe, but Evolution Theory was left to be (or its variances.) It is sort of like how Sikhism (I think it was that religion) has bits and pieces of other religions (namely Judaism/Christianity/Islam and Hinduism/Buddhism.)

    In terms of how it is done, it is similar to assimilation (Science being assimilated into Christianity.) If you can't push something away, make it become a part of you. These people try to force Science to become part of Christianity to preserve their religion.

    It ain't made up one bit.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_design

  2. #62
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,128

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by freeeekyyy View Post
    It's not the state's responsibility to care for the poor, it's the church's responsibility. Trying to enforce a social policy via the state is in violation of people's free will. Jesus never forced anything on anybody, and certainly never invoked the state. It is absolutely right to help those in need and wrong to not do so. But it's also wrong to use force to make people "give," because that isn't really giving.
    If what you say is true, then trying to enforce any law is in violation of people's free will. Are you against all positive law and states in general?

  3. #63
    now! in shell form INA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    intp
    Posts
    3,198

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicodemus View Post
    If what you say is true, then trying to enforce any law is in violation of people's free will.
    I read from his post that he thinks it's not a proper subject for law, not that it's a law of the land that should not be enforced or that there should be no positive law.
    hoarding time and space
    A single event can awaken within us a stranger totally unknown to us. To live is to be slowly born.
    — Antoine de Saint-Exupery

  4. #64
    Cheeseburgers freeeekyyy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ILI Te
    Posts
    1,387

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rail Tracer View Post
    To circumvent science and the Evolutionary Theory, these people purpose that God created the universe, but Evolution Theory was left to be (or its variances.) It is sort of like how Sikhism (I think it was that religion) has bits and pieces of other religions (namely Judaism/Christianity/Islam and Hinduism/Buddhism.)

    In terms of how it is done, it is similar to assimilation (Science being assimilated into Christianity.) If you can't push something away, make it become a part of you. These people try to force Science to become part of Christianity to preserve their religion.

    It ain't made up one bit.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_design

    Evolution isn't a religion. There's nothing incompatible about religions and non-religions.
    You lose.

    _______

    RCOEI
    Melancholic-Choleric
    Respectful Leader

    Johari Window|Nohari Window

  5. #65
    Cheeseburgers freeeekyyy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ILI Te
    Posts
    1,387

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicodemus View Post
    If what you say is true, then trying to enforce any law is in violation of people's free will. Are you against all positive law and states in general?
    I think the state has a legitimate role in defending people from harm to which they did not consent, because that gets in the way of their rights and ability to live their lives as they please, but anything beyond that is outside, or at least should be outside it's influence. There are practical benefits to such a system too. Society is free to evolve in the way most suitable to the people who make it up. They may be "living in sin," but that's their choice.
    You lose.

    _______

    RCOEI
    Melancholic-Choleric
    Respectful Leader

    Johari Window|Nohari Window

  6. #66
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,128

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by freeeekyyy View Post
    I think the state has a legitimate role in defending people from harm to which they did not consent, because that gets in the way of their rights and ability to live their lives as they please, but anything beyond that is outside, or at least should be outside it's influence.
    What are these rights and where do they come from?

    Quote Originally Posted by freeeekyyy View Post
    There are practical benefits to such a system too. Society is free to evolve in the way most suitable to the people who make it up. They may be "living in sin," but that's their choice.
    US society evolved to the point to sign the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act into law. It even happened the way it is supposed to. So, unless democracy itself is in violation of people's free will, I see no way to call it illegitimate.

  7. #67
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Haven't read most of the thread, but did watch the video and looked at the first 10-15 posts. The woman in the video was an absolute idiot, and I do fear the odd combination of absolutism and relativism as practiced by these conservative christians. When it all comes down to it, though, this is largely a reaction against the complete dominance the scientific establishment possesses when it comes to the "truth".

    It only takes a few key observations for this kind of phenomenon to appear:

    1. It is a fact that scientific paradigms shift, so what is taught today will probably not be considered the (whole) truth 100 years from now. Hell, at CERN, the previously inviolable speed of light was just violated. Time to rewrite the science books. Thomas Kuhn had a legitimate point, so there's actually some solid philosophical backing behind a skeptical position toward the scientific establishment.

    2. Scientists are fallible. The favorite of the anti-global warming crowd was the Time magazine cover from the 70s declaring that scientists believed we were about to enter a potentially catastrophic period of global cooling. In the last year or two, Russian scientists have still been arguing that this is the case. When you read about things like this, and recognize what Kuhn was pointing to, it makes you question a bit more the current scientific consensus.

    3. Scientists are dependent upon funding, and sometimes that funding is dependent upon the perpetuation of a certain position. This is the one that really gets people on both sides of the issue rankled up, because the "pro-science" camp gets their panties all in a bunch that scientists could possibly be considered partial to their position, and the "anti-science" camp can't believe that the "pro-science" camp can't understand that scientists could be considered partial to their position, when it comes to their job, livelihood, family, and other reasons of personal self-interest. The ClimateGate scandal certainly didn't help the "pro-science" camp, in this regard, and, at least for the moment, it gave the "anti-science" camp all the fuel it needs to burn its fire for at least another five years. And, strictly from a philosophical perspective, if you don't think scientists are capable of allowing their personal self-interest leak into their take on things, I think you're either stupid, or you're lying to yourself. They are humans before they are scientists, and certain conclusions start seeming a lot more realistic when they are what puts the food on the table.

    4. Science is increasingly getting a stake in political questions, particularly surrounding issues like global warming, and, when you consider the above three observations, and that they all basically point to the fallibility of the current scientific consensus, it's a bit more understandable why people are expressing a degree of skepticism toward the scientific establishment.

  8. #68
    Senior Member burymecloser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    514

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by freeeekyyy View Post
    Jesus didn't teach "tolerance." He did teach that all men are sinners, and that there's only one way out, and that's through Him.
    I don't think that's right. Where in scripture did Jesus teach that all men are sinners? And other than a couple passages in John where the Father and Son are equated, when did Jesus claim that salvation could only be achieved through his own person? I'm pretty sure those ideas were creations of the early Church, not Jesus' teachings in the Gospel.
    i just want to be a sweetheart

  9. #69
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by freeeekyyy View Post
    This isn't the Republican mainstream. The republican mainstream isn't really concerned with these issues at all right now, as much as the democratic mainstream may want it to be.
    Bull. They might be outwardly focused on other issues (because the economy currently sucks), but evolution, global warming, abortion, and gay marriage are ALWAYS concerns.
    "We grow up thinking that beliefs are something to be proud of, but they're really nothing but opinions one refuses to reconsider. Beliefs are easy. The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to growth and wisdom, because "strength of belief" is only the intensity with which you resist questioning yourself. As soon as you are proud of a belief, as soon as you think it adds something to who you are, then you've made it a part of your ego."

  10. #70
    Cheeseburgers freeeekyyy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ILI Te
    Posts
    1,387

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by burymecloser View Post
    I don't think that's right. Where in scripture did Jesus teach that all men are sinners? And other than a couple passages in John where the Father and Son are equated, when did Jesus claim that salvation could only be achieved through his own person? I'm pretty sure those ideas were creations of the early Church, not Jesus' teachings in the Gospel.
    Read John 14. If Jesus' own words can't be trusted, then we can't have a discussion.
    You lose.

    _______

    RCOEI
    Melancholic-Choleric
    Respectful Leader

    Johari Window|Nohari Window

Similar Threads

  1. please tell me someone is inventing this (i don't see why they wouldn't)
    By prplchknz in forum Home, Garden and Nature
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12-28-2014, 08:57 PM
  2. Started my own religion. This is the telling of the first week in the universe.
    By Chimerical in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 01-15-2012, 11:51 PM
  3. Please tell me how it feels like to use your primary functions in everyday life
    By Lightyear in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 05-19-2010, 09:49 PM
  4. Could someone please tell me how to become more "healthy"?
    By Queen Kat in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 07-22-2009, 11:43 AM
  5. [MBTItm] Could someone please tell me what the 'strength of preference percentage' means?
    By Lindaxo in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 04-12-2008, 03:54 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO