Religion and Politics

[CyniQ]

However, I also KNOW that things do evolve naturally,

Hmmm. No offense Sens. But you don't KNOW your ass from a hole in the ground. That wasn't offensive. Was it?? Neither do I. Evolution and adaptation are very different. I think we're talking about different definitions of the same terminology. The point is that there is no evidence that one species "evolved" into another... and without that. There is NO evolution.

Grizz:

A series of statements, do not an arguement make. I'm begining to think that you're just trying to irritate me. You obviously do not have a significant arguement that counters mine or Bob's. Why don't you accept that what we say makes sense? It's not that hard is it? We're intelligent men. It does you no disservice to acknowledge that beliefs we hold to be true are viable. Certainly you expect no less.

The fossil record supports the "theory" of CREATION. What more do you want? I say that God may have parted the Red Sea using magnetic fields. And you say "Where are the magnets??" ????? How is that logical? That's childish. Why don't you just say, "WHY?" or "HOW?". That would be just as good.

You said that the earth was flat 500 years ago. The Bible said that it was round 3500 years ago. Address that. Please.

You know I love you right?

 

[Grizzly]

When I'm done thinking about punching you in the head, I'll think about responding.

 

[Grizzly]

Ok, so whoopty-fucking do, Moses said the earth was round. Oorah! I was referring to the prevailing attitudes of Europe in the 15th century. Any seafaring peoples knew the world to be round. From what I have read, this was common knowledge amongst the Phoenicians. Again, here come Moses with some real revolutionary shit.

Furthermore, dead bodies, menstrating women and shit do not cause disease. Germs cause disease. Germs just happen to be in high concentrations among shitty, bleeding, dead bodies. Wow, takes a real observant guy to figure that one out. If Moses was a character in a white wolf RPG, he would have a perception score of atleast 3. And that's not so bad since 5 is the highest.

If you speak of the absence of the missing link, then maybe you have a small point with the fossil record. However, there is clear evidence that there hase been many "versions" of man. Astrolopithecenes, homo something or another, Neandethals and a whole bunch whose names I can't remember. In fact, during the Neanderthal age, those surmised to be the precursors of todays humans appeared.

Which, to me, shows that they popped out of neanderthals. Evolved, if you will. At the very least, it shows a very, very distinct fuck up in the Bible. God created man. As it is understood, it means today's humans. Fuck, now you're really pissing me off and ruining my ability to make coherent points.

And why in the fuck would an OOOG need magnets to part a sea? He can create man from thin air, but he needs props to do something simple as that? Don't be a retard.(you started it) Besides, wasn't it just plain Moses who did it by raising his magical staff of holiness?

Regardless of whether magnets were used or not, the magnets necessary to do that could not have existed as they would be those newfangled, super duper, high voltage electrical magnets that need...well, you know, like, elec-fucking-tricity to work. So now you're telling me that, not only were magnets used, but Moses put up a nuclear power plant, strung up some wiring and conduit, made gigantic electric magnets and then parted the sea all before the bad guys got to him? You're right, this Moses dude is one spectacular individual.

 

[Grizzly]

It is not necessarily a contradiction, because power just means the capacity to do something....but the more I think about this, humans seem like little people in God's micro machine world~Sensational

The contradiction is seen in the ALL powerful and ALL good. If he's just good, but not ALL good, then it's alright because maybe he thinks murder, rape, extortion, etc are all ok some of the time. However, the ALL good implies perfect goodness. Incapable of evil or of allowing evil given the power to stop it. So then he must not be ALL powerful. If he was, then he would be more than able to stop the devil and his evil machinations at any point in time.

 

[CyniQ]

Ok, so whoopty-fucking do, Moses said the earth was round. Oorah! I was referring to the prevailing attitudes of Europe in the 15th century. Any seafaring peoples knew the world to be round. From what I have read, this was common knowledge amongst the Phoenicians. Again, here come Moses with some real revolutionary shit.

Furthermore, dead bodies, menstrating women and shit do not cause disease. Germs cause disease. Germs just happen to be in high concentrations among shitty, bleeding, dead bodies. Wow, takes a real observant guy to figure that one out. If Moses was a character in a white wolf RPG, he would have a perception score of atleast 3. And that's not so bad since 5 is the highest.

If you speak of the absence of the missing link, then maybe you have a small point with the fossil record. However, there is clear evidence that there hase been many "versions" of man. Astrolopithecenes, homo something or another, Neandethals and a whole bunch whose names I can't remember. In fact, during the Neanderthal age, those surmised to be the precursors of todays humans appeared.

Which, to me, shows that they popped out of neanderthals. Evolved, if you will. At the very least, it shows a very, very distinct fuck up in the Bible. God created man. As it is understood, it means today's humans. Fuck, now you're really pissing me off and ruining my ability to make coherent points.

And why in the fuck would an OOOG need magnets to part a sea? He can create man from thin air, but he needs props to do something simple as that? Don't be a retard.(you started it) Besides, wasn't it just plain Moses who did it by raising his magical staff of holiness?

Regardless of whether magnets were used or not, the magnets necessary to do that could not have existed as they would be those newfangled, super duper, high voltage electrical magnets that need...well, you know, like, elec-fucking-tricity to work. So now you're telling me that, not only were magnets used, but Moses put up a nuclear power plant, strung up some wiring and conduit, made gigantic electric magnets and then parted the sea all before the bad guys got to him? You're right, this Moses dude is one spectacular individual.

Some of the "missing links" have been proven to be hoaxes. Both "neanderthal" and "cro-magnon" man are now classified as homo sapiens. There are a number of HUMAN races that resemble "ancient" (neanderthal) man. Some island peoples of the south pacific have cranium capacities more than 200cc's smaller than europeans. Despite the hooplah, many HONEST scientists assert that if you dressed cromag or neander in modern clothes and put him in the New York subway, No one would look twice. I have a neighbor that looks just like cro-magnon man. I wish I could send you a pic. He IS THE missing link. But he walks among us, apparently as a full-fledged human, in 2005. There is absolutely NOTHING in the fossil record that supports the idea of one species evolving into another. Not to mention, alternate "versions" of man.

Moses, Jesus, and other biblical "miracle" workers never claimed to have produced their events of their own accord. The higher power that created all life on earth is certainly capable of manipulating magnetic fields. With or without batteries...

With regard to Moses simply being observant. Do you know when the medical profession realized that it was necessary to wash your hands after dealing with dead or sick people??? I'll give you a hint. It was less than 100 years ago. Moses must have been more than observant. There is no way he could have figured it out on his own. Certainly a man who believed in Magical, invisible beings would have a more mystical explanation for such things. Don't you think??

 

[CyniQ]

If he was, then he would be more than able to stop the devil and his evil machinations at any point in time.

I could explain that if you like. But it's a purely religious topic. If you don't believe in the bible or religion...

Kind of pointless isn't it?

 

[CyniQ]

Testing, testing. 1, 2, 3...

Sibilance, sibilance.

 

[swing]

With regard to Moses simply being observant. Do you know when the medical profession realized that it was necessary to wash your hands after dealing with dead or sick people??? I'll give you a hint. It was less than 100 years ago. Moses must have been more than observant. There is no way he could have figured it out on his own. Certainly a man who believed in Magical, invisible beings would have a more mystical explanation for such things. Don't you think??

Minor correction: Sanitation has existed outside of the biblical arena for quite awhile. Although sanitation made be a relatively recent phenomenon in the West, the practice has been in existence for well over 1000 years in The Middle Eastern Region (specifically amongst the arabs), as well as Africa. It is well documented that individuals such as Ibn Sina, Al-Afkani, Ibn Qayyim, and others were well aware of the necessity of sterilization, and the ability of bacteria to spread. It is common for people in that part of the world to not only wash their hands, but to also rinse their mouths prior to eating.

Furthermore, it is believed the Arabs and Africans were among the first to realize that merely wiping oneself after "answering the call of nature" is insufficient. They began utilizing water as a regular means of cleansing themselves after both urinating and defecating. European scientists have recently verified the benefits of such acts. As a result, the Europeans, along with the Chinese, Africans, and South-East Asians have incorporated this practice into their lifestyle. Unfortunately, this sanitary practice has not yet reached the mainstream of American culture.

 

[CyniQ]

Minor correction: Sanitation has existed outside of the biblical arena for quite awhile. Although sanitation made be a relatively recent phenomenon in the West, the practice has been in existence for well over 1000 years in The Middle Eastern Region (specifically amongst the arabs), as well as Africa. It is well documented that individuals such as Ibn Sina, Al-Afkani, Ibn Qayyim, and others were well aware of the necessity of sterilization, and the ability of bacteria to spread. It is common for people in that part of the world to not only wash their hands, but to also rinse their mouths prior to eating.

Furthermore, it is believed the Arabs and Africans were among the first to realize that merely wiping oneself after "answering the call of nature" is insufficient. They began utilizing water as a regular means of cleansing themselves after both urinating and defecating. European scientists have recently verified the benefits of such acts. As a result, the Europeans, along with the Chinese, Africans, and South-East Asians have incorporated this practice into their lifestyle. Unfortunately, this sanitary practice has not yet reached the mainstream of American culture.

Excellent points. I know that the Qur'an advocates or even commands washing oneself. Particularly with regard to the Wudu(sp?) or partial ablution before prayer. (Qur'an 5:7 and 4:43) these commands were "revealed" approximately 1400 years ago. But I must point out that Moses wrote down the sanitary directives in Leviticus about 3500 years ago. Not that chronology necessarily proves anything, but you get the idea.

 

[Grizzly]

Let me go back for a minute....

So to say that science eventually reveals truth is probably irrefutable. But why do science and faith or religion have to be mutually exclusive??

They're mutually exclusive because science is predicated on a static set of laws, axioms, rules, etc.,. Religion says that these can be suspended at any time according to the whims of an invisible man. If you want to reconcile religion and science, then future scientific texts will have to read:

An object with a higher density will always sink in a fluid of lesser density. Unless, of course, God deems it necessary for you to be able to walk on top of said fluid.

Earthquakes are caused by the shifting of techtonic plates, except in the cases when God is pissed of and wants to punish people.

Spontaneous combustion, turning into salt, turning into another animal, etc. is impossible, unless God decides to blow you up or turn you into something.

A trumpet is a cute little instrument capable of making good jazz and decibel levels of X. However, if God decides, then your trumpet may make such a racket that New York City falls to the floor.

If you have 2 fish, then you will always have two fish unless you eat one and then you will have one fish. The exception to this rule is if god decides to spontaneously multiply your fishes because he wants you to have a party.

Simply put, science and religion are most certainly mutually exclusive.

 

[CyniQ]

Let me go back for a minute....



They're mutually exclusive because science is predicated on a static set of laws, axioms, rules, etc.,. Religion says that these can be suspended at any time according to the whims of an invisible man. If you want to reconcile religion and science, then future scientific texts will have to read:

An object with a higher density will always sink in a fluid of lesser density. Unless, of course, God deems it necessary for you to be able to walk on top of said fluid.

Earthquakes are caused by the shifting of techtonic plates, except in the cases when God is pissed of and wants to punish people.

Spontaneous combustion, turning into salt, turning into another animal, etc. is impossible, unless God decides to blow you up or turn you into something.

A trumpet is a cute little instrument capable of making good jazz and decibel levels of X. However, if God decides, then your trumpet may make such a racket that New York City falls to the floor.

If you have 2 fish, then you will always have two fish unless you eat one and then you will have one fish. The exception to this rule is if god decides to spontaneously multiply your fishes because he wants you to have a party.

Simply put, science and religion are most certainly mutually exclusive.

LMAO. "If you have 2 fish, then you will always have two fish unless you eat one and then you will have one fish." That's great.

You're much too reasonable to run around declaring things impossible. You said yourself, before 1903 sustained flights of a heavier than air machine were impossible. I think you're looking at the bible too literally. If the world, universe, nature, etc. were in fact created by a higher being. Then he put in place natural laws to maintain order. Some people say that God is all powerful and can do anything. I don't necessarily believe that. The bible says that he CANNOT lie. Not that he won't, or he chooses not to, but that he CAN'T. I think that he cannot violate his own laws, merely manipulate them. That's why it is interesting to me that things like parting a body of water using magnetic fields and destroying a solid structure with sound waves are actually possible. Oh yeah, BTW, that whole trumpets levelling cities thing? That was duplicated in a lab. Ooooh. But it wasn't a WHOLE city. Just a block wall. AND they didn't actually level it, just crumbled it a little. So nevermind it's all shit .

 

[Grizzly]

It's like fate and freewill. If you believe in fate, then you can't have freewill. They are 100% exclusive of each other. Irrefutably, but you can try. LOL If God has "a plan", then you don't have free will. Presuming, of course, that he actually manipulates the world in an effort to achieve the realization of the "plan."

 

[CyniQ]

If God has "a plan", then you don't have free will. Presuming, of course, that he actually manipulates the world in an effort to achieve the realization of the "plan."

It's funny the things that make people feel warm and fuzzy. I think that the existence of God is at least somewhat proven by man's apparently innate desire to search for him.

But anyway, fate. I actually like the idea of fate in a way. If everything is fate, you may not have free will. But it seems to YOU that you do. You'll never know the difference. AND. you've got nothing to worry about. You can do anything you want, because nothing you do can change your fate. Sleep peacefully at night because if someone were to sneak in and take your life... it was fate. There was nothing you could do about it anyway.

Anyway, the bible says nothing about God manipulating world events on a regular basis. At this particular point in human history, he's lettin it ride. So there are no modern day miracles, no divine intervention or any of that. If two kids decided to shoot up their HS it was because they decided to do it. NOT because the school board voted against student prayer. Be certain that you don't lump me in with the Jerry Falwell fundementalist christian. I'm the smartest God-lover you ever met.

edit- Maybe not as smart as I think I am. F-U-N-D-A-M-E-N-T-A-L-I-S-T

 

[Sensational]

Hmmm. No offense Sens. But you don't KNOW your ass from a hole in the ground. That wasn't offensive. Was it?? Neither do I. Evolution and adaptation are very different. I think we're talking about different definitions of the same terminology. The point is that there is no evidence that one species "evolved" into another... and without that. There is NO evolution.

Grizz:

A series of statements, do not an arguement make. I'm begining to think that you're just trying to irritate me. You obviously do not have a significant arguement that counters mine or Bob's. Why don't you accept that what we say makes sense? It's not that hard is it? We're intelligent men. It does you no disservice to acknowledge that beliefs we hold to be true are viable. Certainly you expect no less.

The fossil record supports the "theory" of CREATION. What more do you want? I say that God may have parted the Red Sea using magnetic fields. And you say "Where are the magnets??" ????? How is that logical? That's childish. Why don't you just say, "WHY?" or "HOW?". That would be just as good.

You said that the earth was flat 500 years ago. The Bible said that it was round 3500 years ago. Address that. Please.

You know I love you right?

Well, evolution is the cumulation of minor genetic adaptations thus the genetic code has evolved. We have seen the branching of species in science in the last hundred years thus things do evolve.

 

[Sensational]

It's like fate and freewill. If you believe in fate, then you can't have freewill. They are 100% exclusive of each other. Irrefutably, but you can try. LOL If God has "a plan", then you don't have free will. Presuming, of course, that he actually manipulates the world in an effort to achieve the realization of the "plan."

I have always wondered and thought about this also...it has been a hang up in my faith for sure.

 

[CyniQ]

Well, evolution is the cumulation of minor genetic adaptations thus the genetic code has evolved. We have seen the branching of species in science in the last hundred years thus things do evolve.

The difference between evolution and adaptation is species. Can you cite an example of one species that "evolved" into a completely different species? Especially in the last hundred years. That would be quite a feat. Can you even cite examples of a species "adaptating" some useful feature that it did not previously possess?

I certainly don't claim to be a biology expert. But something like that would be big news.

 

[CyniQ]

In fact, during the Neanderthal age, those surmised to be the precursors of todays humans appeared.

Which, to me, shows that they popped out of neanderthals. Evolved, if you will.

BTW. Just because I want to piss you off I'm going to point out that there is (or was) no "Neanderthal Age". The Neanderthal man was so named because of the place he was found (Neander, France I think?). He supposedly lived in the Pleistocene Epoch.

 

[Sensational]

The difference between evolution and adaptation is species. Can you cite an example of one species that "evolved" into a completely different species? Especially in the last hundred years. That would be quite a feat. Can you even cite examples of a species "adaptating" some useful feature that it did not previously possess?

I certainly don't claim to be a biology expert. But something like that would be big news.

Yes let me look it up tomorrow after I finish studying for my test. Darwin actually witnessed the genetic adaptations to suit environment in his studies, as you have no doubt heard, he called this survival of the fittest. For instance ( and I will bring the hard evidence tomorrow) a certain member of a species who has the genetic traits to survive in a certain environment will thrive and reproduce, and his offspring will have these same genetic traits. Then, when a new environmental factor is introduced and it threatens the species, a certain member who is genetic different (via mutation) will thrive in that environment and reproduce. This is evolution in action, and that is useful genetic mutations over a period of time can lead to a species which looks entirely unrelated and thus must be classified as its own species.

And Grizz, I beleive that the free will and God's plan are not mutually exclusive. God has a plan for us...whether or not we follow it is our choice and thus we have free will.
~Sensational

 

[CyniQ]

For instance ( and I will bring the hard evidence tomorrow) a certain member of a species who has the genetic traits to survive in a certain environment will thrive and reproduce, and his offspring will have these same genetic traits. Then, when a new environmental factor is introduced and it threatens the species, a certain member who is genetic different (via mutation) will thrive in that environment and reproduce.~Sensational

What you describe does not even remotely resemble evolution as the theory exists today. Okay, maybe it "remotely" resembles it. If I'm bigger than you, and I kill you. You can no longer reproduce. I, on the other hand, as the survivor of the battle, can reproduce all I want. Now all the babies will look like me and not you. That is hardly evolution. Mankind should be so lucky...

 

[Bob Smith]

This is evolution in action, and that is useful genetic mutations over a period of time can lead to a species which looks entirely unrelated and thus must be classified as its own species.

That is speciation and not evolution. I dont, and I dont think CyniQ, doubts that speciation does occur. But that is a far cry from evolutionary theory. Sure, a certain type of bird, over time, changes and becomes a different version of....a bird. The organism is no more complex than the previous version, it is simply different. Evolution states that the organism becomes more complex. When has a genetic mutation (addition of genetic information) yielded a viable organism? It hasnt. Genetic additions cause "broken" organisms, such as what occurs with Downs Syndrome.

What I believe CyniQ to be asking is, when did the previously mentioned bird become a dog or human or something other than a bird?