Christian faith in the other good book

Welcome to Fundies! Here you can discuss, vent about, or bash fundamentalists of all persuasions. That means pagan fundies, too.
User avatar
BornoftheEarth
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 21
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 11:31 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, Pa, USA
Contact:

Post by BornoftheEarth » Thu Feb 15, 2007 9:27 pm

Graver wrote:If proof comes about, I can accept it. I just hope the same can be said of the rest of the world when proof that's its no more true than the sun revolver around the Earth comes out.
Because, you know, the church was right about THAT whole ordeal. Stupid Galileo, what did he know?
Graver wrote:Give it 20 years and we;ll all look back on the 20th Century and have a good laugh at ourselves (and probably forget to mention that it survived into the 21st Century).
Kind of like how we look back over the past 1000 years and laugh at all the crap the church has said was fact.
Odin, guide our ships,
our axes, spears and swords!
Guide us through storms that whip
and in brutal war!

-Amon Amarth-

User avatar
Graver
Level 4
Level 4
Posts: 95
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 2:45 pm
Contact:

Post by Graver » Thu Feb 15, 2007 10:34 pm

EXACTLY like that!
Maybe not?

User avatar
BornoftheEarth
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 21
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 11:31 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, Pa, USA
Contact:

Post by BornoftheEarth » Thu Feb 15, 2007 10:38 pm

Then how can you claim that the church is any more right about this then they were with any multitude of things that they were wrong with in the past? They've been proven wrong time and time again, how is this time different?

Your logic runs in circles.
Odin, guide our ships,
our axes, spears and swords!
Guide us through storms that whip
and in brutal war!

-Amon Amarth-

User avatar
Graver
Level 4
Level 4
Posts: 95
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 2:45 pm
Contact:

Post by Graver » Thu Feb 15, 2007 10:54 pm

I never claimed to side with the Church. Honestly, the biggest reason that I'm not as opposed to evolution as I "should be" is because of the Church's tendency towards willing ignorance. The reason I don't believe evoltionary theory is real is because I just don't think that's the way it happened. There are so many flighty, idiotic aspects of it that are wisely considered as "valid" for ME to see it as valid. Sting rays used to be sharks that flattened themselves out on the ocean floor? Come on!

The Bible doesn't really even exclude evolution as a possibility, at least for things other than Humans. It never says that sharks didn't some day flatten themselves out of the ocean floor and become string rays!

Anyway, I think it'd be folly for the Church to accept it, because it would just add another blemish to their already tarnished scientific record (you might take the fact that the church IS slowly accepting it as a less-than-favorable sign for evolution's validity).
Maybe not?

User avatar
BornoftheEarth
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 21
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 11:31 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, Pa, USA
Contact:

Post by BornoftheEarth » Thu Feb 15, 2007 11:17 pm

Graver wrote: (you might take the fact that the church IS slowly accepting it as a less-than-favorable sign for evolution's validity).
This too, makes no sense. The church has since accepted what Galileo once stated, does that mean that it in invalid? If the church is slowly accepting the idea of evolution, it is only because to continue to refute it would make them look even dumber than they already look.
Graver wrote:The reason I don't believe evoltionary theory is real is because I just don't think that's the way it happened.
I'm sure that being a 20 year old, who probably has not ventured much into scientific study, gives you a better insight to what really happend than say, loads of people who have spent their entire life testing and researching such things. Its too easy to just say, "well, I just dont think it happend that way". No reasons or data to back anything up, just "nope, not how it happened." But then again, thats what a typical Xian would do.
Odin, guide our ships,
our axes, spears and swords!
Guide us through storms that whip
and in brutal war!

-Amon Amarth-

User avatar
Rain ForestMoon
Level 11
Level 11
Posts: 314
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 2:13 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Post by Rain ForestMoon » Fri Feb 16, 2007 12:05 am

Graver wrote:.....The reason I don't believe evoltionary theory is real is because I just don't think that's the way it happened.....
Are you saying that your "rejection" of evolutionary theory is on scientific grounds?
RainForestMoon

"Excess of anything is bad, but especially the excess of Moderation"

"AQUILA NON CAPIT MUSCAS'

User avatar
katsu
Level 12
Level 12
Posts: 341
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2004 11:55 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Post by katsu » Fri Feb 16, 2007 12:35 am

Graver wrote: The Bible doesn't really even exclude evolution as a possibility, at least for things other than Humans.
Take out your Bible, Son.....
There are 2 versions of the Creation. One tells of mankind being created, the other tells of Iaweh creating Adam.
He had 2 sons, who got into a bit of a fight(to say the least). And the winner found himself running away from his problems. He got himself a wife. Where the heck do you think he got her from?

Perchance the Creator(Deity, Spirit, etc)of the first story created our ancestors and Cain married one of their evolved offspring.
And also read 2 Peter 3:8 if you think timing is wrong.

Does this mean the Bible is true? No, it was written by man and we are not perfect. Was it inspired by the Divine; I believe so. Just as I believe the Q'ran, the Edda's, the Veda's and even the Mabinogion were so inspired.

Yours from underneath the Great Oak,
Katsu
/|\

User avatar
Jescissa
Level 22
Level 22
Posts: 643
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2006 1:51 pm
Location: Wales
Contact:

Post by Jescissa » Fri Feb 16, 2007 12:47 am

Graver wrote:The reason I don't believe evoltionary theory is real is because I just don't think that's the way it happened.
Fair enough :-D There is plenty of room on this beautiful great Earth for all theories and viewpoints. In the end, it doesn't matter how we got here, it matters what we do with our time while we're here.
"If you trust in yourself and believe in your dreams and follow your star...you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy. Goodbye." - Miss Tick, Terry Pratchett's Wee Free Men

User avatar
Rain ForestMoon
Level 11
Level 11
Posts: 314
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 2:13 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Post by Rain ForestMoon » Fri Feb 16, 2007 2:07 am

Graver wrote:......There are so many flighty, idiotic aspects of it that are wisely considered as "valid" for ME to see it as valid. Sting rays used to be sharks that flattened themselves out on the ocean floor? Come on!.....
The theory of evolution makes no such claim.

If you were taught that it does, then you have been lied to.

And If you try to tell us that this is what the theory of evolution entails, then you are trying to lie to us.


So, what are you?

A fool for believing such lies about the theory of evolution without checking the facts?
A liar for knowingly spreading such falsehoods about the theory of evolution?
Or a combination of the two?
RainForestMoon

"Excess of anything is bad, but especially the excess of Moderation"

"AQUILA NON CAPIT MUSCAS'

User avatar
Ragnar
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2820
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 12:26 pm
Location: Preußen (Deutschland).
Contact:

Post by Ragnar » Fri Feb 16, 2007 2:55 am

Graver wrote:Sting rays used to be sharks that flattened themselves out on the ocean floor?
Bollocks!

NO WHERE does it claim that Stingray developed from sharks.

They are, however, genetically, the same family,. or group. Much as wolves and dingoes are both "Cannus".

http://www3.nationalgeographic.com/anim ... ngray.html

Like its shark relatives, the stingray is outfitted with electrical sensors called ampullae of Lorenzini. Located around the stingray's mouth, these organs sense the natural electrical charges of potential prey. Many rays have jaw teeth to enable them to crush invertebrates such as clams, oysters, and mussels.

================================

http://www.bornfree.org.uk/dolphin/news060622.shtml

Along with skates and sharks, the stingray (Dasyatidae spp) belongs to the Elasmobranch group.

================================
http://www.fishingandboats.com/sting-ray-fish.html
The stingray (Dasyatidae) is a part of a larger family of rays that are related to both sharks and skates. They are very common in coastal tropical water and in most places throughout the world.
================================
http://filaman.ifm-geomar.de/Summary/Sp ... ng=English
Family: Dasyatidae (Stingrays) picture (Daben_u0.jpg) by Iranian Fisheries Research Organization (IFRO)

Point map Order: Rajiformes (skates and rays) Class: Elasmobranchii (sharks and rays) FishBase name: Bennett's stingray
================================

http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/fish/Gallery/D ... ngray.html

Taxonomy
Lesueur first described this stingray as Trygon sabina in 1824. Since then it has appeared in literature under a variety of names including Pastinaca sabina, Trygon tuberculata, Dasibatis sabina, Dasybatis sabina, Dasybatus sabinus, and Amphotistius sabinus. The genus Dasyatis of the currently accepted scientific name is derived from the Greek word "dasys" meaning rough or dense and "(b)atus" meaning shark.
================================
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stingray
Dasyatidae is a family of rays, cartilaginous marine fishes, related to skates and sharks.
================================
http://marinebio.org/all.asp?formaction ... mobranchii

User avatar
Kitsune
Level 70
Level 70
Posts: 2097
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 12:33 pm
Location: Calgary, Canada
Zodiac: Capricorn
Contact:

Post by Kitsune » Fri Feb 16, 2007 10:16 am

Perhaps it's just me, but I don't see why Evolution and Creation don't get along.

The Bible says that Adam and Eve were the first, not that they were the only.

And evolution is just a good term meaning that God hasn't finished playing with us yet. :lol: After all, what is a day to a God? It could be a century or longer for all we know!

Although I really do enjoy the Other People version. I get the giggles just imagining Caine heading out into the wide world, beyond the desert, finding a town and having the priestess there take care of him while he babbled away incessently about Original Sin, and such. :lol: Poor Caine! It's a good thing they took pity on him and married him off. Otherwise he probally never would have shut up. :lol:
Trying to create a world, even in words, is good occupational therapy for lunatics who think they're God, and an excellent argument for Polytheism. -S.M. Stirling

http://www.bamatthews.comThe Writings and Musings of B.A. Matthews

User avatar
Graver
Level 4
Level 4
Posts: 95
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 2:45 pm
Contact:

Post by Graver » Fri Feb 16, 2007 10:58 am

I don't base my beliefs off of my own scientific expertise, because I have to scientific expertise. I have no reason to have scientific expertise because I see the observational and theoretic sciences as being little more than an orgy of arrogance and ignorance. Those aren't things I want to specialize in. I think the medical sciences are fantastic and one of the greatest achivements of mankind.

But, yeah. No scientific expertise here. Never claimed to have any. Just stated my opinion on it and am now receiving tons of flack for my opinion, with a few tolerant comments mixed in :)

I know that Darwin's evolution doesn't preach that stupid stuff about sharks and stingrays. I don't believe Darwin was an idiot. I think he was a highly-intelligent man. Its the people that are writing the books now that like to spout off about their own theories that are putting more and more hairline fractures in the kettle. I believe it was some oceanologist who made that statement on television a few years back.

Kitsune: Agreed. The Bible doesn't say Adam and Eve were the only ones made from the dust, just the first.
Maybe not?

User avatar
Librarian
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 760
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: Tustin, CA
Zodiac: Capricorn
Contact:

Post by Librarian » Fri Feb 16, 2007 11:47 am

Graver wrote:Sting rays used to be sharks that flattened themselves out on the ocean floor? Come on!

The Bible doesn't really even exclude evolution as a possibility, at least for things other than Humans. It never says that sharks didn't some day flatten themselves out of the ocean floor and become string rays!
You're right, sharks did not evolve into rays, just like chimps did not evolve into humans. These species co-evolved from common ancestors that looked like neiher.

Creationist view:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creatio ... sharks.asp
...evolutionists have absolutely no evidence of what sharks and rays evolved from.
Science:
http://www.elasmodiver.com/elasmobranch_evolution.htm
Chondrichthyes - the cartilaginous fishes that evolved into today's sharks, skates, rays, and chimaeras.
Nice view of their tree:
http://www.fossilmuseum.net/Tree_of_Lif ... hthyes.htm

And, of course, a cladogram:
http://www.sju.edu/research/bear_gulch/ ... dogram.php

Five minutes on Google. Yeah, I can see where the creationists MUST be right. #-o
Graver wrote:I think the medical sciences are fantastic and one of the greatest achivements of mankind.
Medicine isn't a science, it's an art.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicine#P ... f_medicine
The practice of medicine combines both science as the evidence base and art in the application of this medical knowledge in combination with intuition and clinical judgment to determine the treatment plan for each patient.
Doesn't sound like a hard science like geology to me.

User avatar
Kystar
Level 57
Level 57
Posts: 1684
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 7:46 am
Location: White Oak, PA
Zodiac: Cancer
Contact:

Post by Kystar » Fri Feb 16, 2007 12:18 pm

Graver wrote:I don't base my beliefs off of my own scientific expertise, because I have to scientific expertise. I have no reason to have scientific expertise because I see the observational and theoretic sciences as being little more than an orgy of arrogance and ignorance. Those aren't things I want to specialize in. I think the medical sciences are fantastic and one of the greatest achivements of mankind.
Without the Observational and Theoretical Sciences there would be very little in the way of Medicine!

It was a person who observed the results of ingesting a certain plant that began the pharmesutical research that led to the containing or curing of how many plagues and diseases, who used observational studies and deductive reasoning, from the prinicples of scientific research, to start the practice of medicine.

Where is the arrogance in wanting to know the WHY and the HOW of things? Where is the ignorance in wanting to figure out why a chemical dervived from a plant can defeat a forgien body in the system?

I don't understand how you can tote the brilliance of Medicine, and yet at the same time smash down the deductive reasoning and observational sciences that make medicine move forward and ensure that medicine doesn't wipe out more of us than it helps!

Scientists can be carried away by their own studies, but they have made great strides in amassing knowledge that helps us. Would you have the creature comforts of your current life if it weren't for science trying to find a way to make life better? Would our food be safe? Our water drinkable? Would that computer you are posting this on exist if there weren't people interested in science? NO!

Have you ever really looked into what classifies as Science? Have you ever educated yourself on what scientists are looking for, what they're learning and WHY? Your comments make me think that you simply don't care to understand about a lot of things, religion only being one of them. History, sociology and biology seem to also be dismissed in your mind.

I could go on, but I"m at work, so I'll stop.
You say "Witch" like it's a bad thing!

User avatar
Graver
Level 4
Level 4
Posts: 95
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 2:45 pm
Contact:

Post by Graver » Fri Feb 16, 2007 2:28 pm

Well, Kystar, if your admin knows what he's talking about then medicine isn't as reliant on science as you claim it is. And even if that isn't true, you're taking "observational science" to mean much more than it does. Every science requires observations, so if every science that required observation was observational science, then there would just be 1 aspect of science.
Scientists can be carried away by their own studies
That's something we can agree on, if not a bit of an understatement.
but they have made great strides in amassing knowledge that helps us.
That's true. Where would we be, as a civilization, if we didn't have nukes, steroids, or breast implants? It would truly be a sad land to live in.
Would you have the creature comforts of your current life if it weren't for science trying to find a way to make life better?
No. There would be a great deal of luxuries that we wouldn't enjoy today. I mean, food would be way more expensive, because scientists wouldn't have been able to genetically alter our foods into mutated super-foods.
Would our food be safe? Our water drinkable?
Nope. Sure wouldn't. If it wasn't for the marvels of science, we'd all be dead. You know why all those people who lived before the marvels of science are dead? because they didn't have the marvels of science! It doesn't matter that the Jews had laws governing what and how they could eat to protect them from disease, because they all still died, right? Oh, thank you powerful science for saving humanity!
Would that computer you are posting this on exist if there weren't people interested in science? NO!
You're right. If it wasn't for the invention of air conditioners, we wouldn't have computers. Its wonderful how science keeps providing us reasons to stay inside, sit our asses down, and just get fat. Wonderful stuff!
Maybe not?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest