![]() |
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
If you fear God (and I use that term in its original sense, rather than the more modern usage) then surely you would be a poor parent if you did not prepare your child for adulthood in a world in which that God is manifest. If you believe in a less traditional and more personal spirituality then you would likely wish your child to discover their spirituality for themself. If, however, you believe in a God whose existence is defined and interpreted through the theological structures of an organised church, surely the sensible thing to do as a parent would be to introduce your child to that church and its structures from an early age. If you believe in the existence of Heaven and Hell, and that the way to the former is through acceptance of God's will or Christ's sacrifice, then surely the most loving thing to do as a parent is to ensure your child has access to the means of salvation. On a much simpler level, and to be fair to parents of whatever faith, raising children is a difficult thing. You do not become a parent and suddenly slough off your own hang-ups, desires, cultural norms and perspectives. You do not suddenly become an objective outsider to that child's upbringing. You will therefore bring something of yourself to that child's raising. If religion is a large part of who you are, then you are likely to bring religion into that child's life. We teach our children the concept of right and wrong, how to cross a road safely and whether to value education. For someone who considers religion to be an essential part of life, it would surely seem an abrogation of parental duty not to teach that too. |
Quote:
Quote:
|
First the Darwinists, now the Galileoists are stifling academic debate!
|
My parents, both being atheist, sent me to church and catholic school until I was a junior and begged to go to public school. Whether they did this out of some sense of "a balanced world view" or to appease my mother's maniacally Catholic parents, I don't know. All I know is that I can't say it was the end of the world.
Quote:
And it is for THAT reason that I will tell my child exactly what I think, and that what Mrs. Praise-Jesus down the street says is absurd for reasons A-D. And hopefully my child won't be duped by the guys standing on the corner with signs that say "God Hates ______". |
Betcha didn't know what really happened to the dinosaurs.
|
Quote:
My wife is a theist and is not indoctrinating my son and feels no need to. There is NO reason to. In fact teaching a child that if they sin they will go to hell and be tortured for eternity is child abuse. Tell me, if someone raised their kids with a bunch of false beliefs like cars could actually fly but they just didn't when she was looking at them for no real reason or that she would one day grow wings and be able to fly... no reason to criticize them right? Just because a lot of people tell their kids something that no one can verify does not make it ok or any any less a lie especially when the book they use and want the kid to learn is full of mass murder, genocide, incest with those they are supposed to be looking UP TO, Jesus telling them to hate their families and much, MUCH more. Sure, tell the kids about religion, I say all of it. Tell them about it, the good and bad and let them decide on their own when they are old enough to understand. Why bother them with it when they are young? There is just no point. |
H. R. Giger, eat your heart out! With both sets of jaws.
|
heard it on npr this am... maxdoublepluscool/scary.
is it just me or does the profile of that creature's head resemble the nose/cockpit profile of the new hondajet? |
Pharyngeal jaws is just what I'd expect from those sneaky Japs.
I can't believe spell-check didn't even blink at pharyngeal. |
Another... drier, but good stuff.
Quote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrLiVn4RGKc http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTtM1A2PPsA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kgz9J0I0Rmc http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11yS_w9487E http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYdXmHgNx-M http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RybXxuuivRc http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIDZoVJjQFI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17Vh8ucPmfc |
:fsm:
|
|
Who remembers the Rain devil huh?? once upon atime when i sagged ur guts into red colred tributaries of vampire drains?? in those days died the blabber xoxoxbruce? remember bro?? so this is the standard you ppl have dawned over this "o once a great community". maybe you ppl can lend some of the teachings. that sounds cool? everybody for tutions please raise thier f*** hands!!
|
:eek: :headshake
A zombie! Kill it with fire, it's the only way to be sure! |
are you freaking kidding me? this idiot is back? i meant the poster above yours BigV, relax;)
|
oh no. i cant still spell m-o-o-n moon but watever, fools dont die. like a pain in ur ass. muhaha
|
guess wat! i think fool gals r supposed to b a part of every society. mayhap god was a fool to start the fucking creation in the first place! sing halellujah!!
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
M-o-o-n....that spells moron.
I am a "The Stand" fan. I think I like "The Shining" the best of all of King's movies (made for tv and otherwise). I sat through "The Langoliers" in pain recently..... |
Quote:
God that was a crappy miniseries (big surprise a Steven King adaptation being crappy). |
|
Pt 11
|
1 Attachment(s)
Hmmm
|
Blimey -I expected a difference between the UK and US, but not that big!
|
I am shamed by the UK's standing!
Blame the people available for surveying I say. Like me they are free during the day... |
Umm why shamed sg?
|
|
Quote:
|
ahhhh I beg your pardon hon, of course that is shaming.
|
It was hard to decide whether to resurrect this thread, or put this in the humor thread:
Quote:
|
:lol2:
I'm too lazy to search, was that posted here? |
No, Roy Comfort is a creationist nutter. That's from his blog ( See the "put this" link).
|
Another tossup. This is just the first bit:
Quote:
|
I'll consider his argument that man didn't evolve from apes, when he shows me a man from another planet.:rolleyes:
|
Quote:
|
Hey, we're all Martians anyways.:alien2:
|
The creation is a birth of something that has a soul and I believe it is beyond any science to infuse the energy seed of life.
|
Your beliefs are your beliefs; they cannot be tested or validated.
That is both consolation and condemnation. |
Quote:
You talk about living things having a soul. Can you detect or otherwise prove the existence of a soul? I will go ahead and assume you cannot, feel free to correct me if I am assuming too much. Given that you cannot prove the existence of a soul, it stands to reason that you could not detect the presence or absence of a soul. So, assuming that science did create a seemingly living animal it would be indistinguishable from that of a truly living animal by your reckoning. In fact, without the ability to observe or detect souls you have no reason to assume that all naturally occurring life has souls. One begins to wonder what could possibly justify such a belief in the first place. Let's all have a though experiment at this point. The question is "Do I have a soul?" Why or why not? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I'll consider his argument that man didn't evolve from apes, when he shows me a man, or a fucking ape, from another planet. Happy? :rolleyes:
|
Quote:
|
Who (what) reproduced asexually by splitting themselves in half?
Kocsis says man couldn't have evolved from apes, because that would leave no explanation for spacemen. I can't consider his argument because I've seen no spacemen... don't believe anyone else has either. But even if someone produces a spaceman, that doesn't prove we didn't evolve from apes, only that spacemen developed somehow, somewhere, and bears investigation. |
Sundae was referencing the post before the spaceman post.
|
Roy Comfort? I'd already discarded him... completely.
|
Quote:
|
Not necessarily. If somebody produces a spaceman, I'd have to reconsider the position of the very few, (read nutters) that have been saying that humans came from other worlds.
If someone produces a spaceman and spacemonkey, that introduces the possibility that; 1- we came from other worlds where we (and the spaceman) evolved from spacemonkeys. 2- we came from other worlds where we [and the spaceman] came about some other way. 3- we evolved from earth monkeys and the spaceman have evolved from spacemonkeys. 4- we evolved from earth monkeys and the spaceman came about some other way. The spaceman and spacemonkey certainly present a myriad of possible scenarios. BUT, until the spaceman, with or without spacemonkey, shows up, I'll stick with the preponderance of evidence that man evolved from apes... earth apes. Which is what I said originally; Quote:
|
Funnily enough, there was an advert on this morning for a series of BBC programmes to celebrate the 150th anniversary of The Origin of the Species. It's called The Origin of Genuis. It's just accepted in this country - Darwin was right, end of. And the vast majority of Christians accept it too.
Then again, I suppose we have such a small population compared to America. The tiny percentage of those that reject the concept of evolution means less in terms of numbers. Anyway, the first programme is called What Darwin Didn't Know. I'll be watching it. |
Quote:
|
Not all the 40% who would like to see the biblical story taught in schools actually adhere to that belief. There are a large number of people who accept evolution as the most likely answer, but who think we should teach both theories in school.
I have only met a handful of people over here who dismiss evolution entirely and subscribe to a non-evolutionary creation story. Most people over here either believe in evolution without God or believe in it with God. I would query their overall results. It doesn't match my own experience of this country: 52% don't believe in evolution at all? That doesn't fit to me. |
The battle ground is the theory of evolution. The underlying theme of the battle is whether or not God is or God is not. Not wether or not evolution is a workable theory or not.
That question can not be answered by the theory of evolution. I think it is misguided to use things such as the theory of evolution to prove or disprove God. God either is, or God is not. As far as I can tell this is a very personal matter. It is also misguided for a believer to get all in a huff over a non believers status as a non believer. |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
When god is personified by human characteristics, then god is simply a false idol. If god has characteristics such as anger and other emotions, then god is only a man – not a god. Clearly, the god defined in a bible is only what naïve children (adults of that time) could comprehend. Time to move on from myths and speculation into, instead, asking what really would be a god. What is defined in the bible is best described as similar to the gods worshipped by the Romans and Greeks – humanized and therefore false idols. Time to ask what a god would really be - which is not what parables in a bible define. But then men were grasping the best they could at that time. |
Therefore, tw, you must logically extend that god 'cares' nothing for humanity, since 'caring' is an anthropomorphization.
So, why do we care about god? |
Quote:
It is no surprise that a more advanced view of what God should be leads to logical inconsistencies. It is religion, it never makes any sense. |
Logical inconsistencies can also be found in observations of experiments conducted at the subatomic level, what we call quantum mechanics. I don't hear many physisists saying "It's just science, it never makes any sense."
My point is this, there are many things in religion that do make sense, and yes there are logical inconsistencies. These also exist in the scientific world as we are able to observe it. Using one or the other to discount one or the other is useless. |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:00 AM. |
Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.