If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Snopes)   South Carolina church tells pupils the Earth is only thousands of years old, dinosaurs lived with man, and how to snap back at anyone who tells them different. Sorry, did I say church? Make that a fourth grade classroom   (snopes.com) divider line 464
    More: Scary  
•       •       •

14951 clicks; posted to Main » on 26 Apr 2013 at 2:11 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



464 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-26 12:10:21 PM  
Global Thermonuclear Derp
 
2013-04-26 12:12:25 PM  

violentsalvation: I've known grown adults who believe that young earth / dinosaur shiat. They were otherwise educated, one I would go so far as to say he is brilliant, but he believes this shiat. I don't farking understand it.


Because this whole "christian" movement in the US has become a gigantic cheer-leading contest instead of an act of faith.

"Look at how hardcore Christian I am! I wear only Christian T-Shirts, only listen to Christian music, worship with guns, hate the gays, hate taxes, and disbelieve evolution!"

If Jesus came back to earth today he'd biatchslap a bunch of these nutty evangelicals.

There is absolutely no reason why you can't believe in God and also acknowledge the scientific basis of evolution. NONE!

Evolution does not answer biogenesis or the existential question as to why the universe exists in the first place, that's a question for the religions and philosophers.
 
2013-04-26 12:13:54 PM  
This is great news.  Ever since the cultural marxists took God out of the classroom the education system has crumbled.  Coincidence?
 
2013-04-26 12:17:19 PM  

johnnyq: mike_d85: As someone who lived "north of Greer" I can tell you there is no private schools north of Greer. And it's pretty much Greer, then nothing, then nothing that belongs to North Carolina.

There's Landrum, although I can understand why you would overlook it.


Overlook Landru?
images2.wikia.nocookie.net
Are you not of the Body?
 
2013-04-26 12:19:16 PM  

a_real_human_being: /personally, I believe the rise in radical atheism has contributed the rise of creationism in the U.S.



I think you've got it backwards.
 
2013-04-26 12:20:51 PM  

ciberido: Uchiha_Cycliste: Ranger Rover: Sure, I would agree with that - I meant for that summation to be encompassed by my assertion that religious assertions are based on "incontrovertible truth" - which requires faith.

Yeah, I just wanted to elaborate that faith *requires* there be no evidence, which makes scientists sort or cross (heh) and as science requires proof its fallacious for religious dillweeds to try to claim that science is a religion since the two couldn't be more mutually exclusive.


No, it doesn't.  Faith is indifferent to evidence.  There can be lots of evidence, noevidence  evidence against, it doesn't matter.  Faith doesn't require anything but faith.  Unless, maybe, your evidence is  a Babel fish.


I don't know that I agree with you. At least with respect to religion, the whole shindig seems to be premised on the idea of having faith despite having no evidence. It's what makes the faith so valuable and elusive. I mean if God were to come down here and give me a wedgie in order to make his presence known I'd have to be an idiot (or a masochist) to not hop on board the Jesus train. I feel like knowing because of the presence of proof, and wondering because of it's absence are opposite sides of the same coin.  To me, Jesus seemed pretty clear about this when he chastised Thomas and said, "shiat bro, you know it's me! what? Do you really need to stick your fingers through the holes in my hands? What the hell? We've been over this over and over and over. Have a little faith in me. And when your secret heart Cannot speak so easily Come in darlin' from a whisper start To have a little faith in me"
I think your interpretation is applicable to virtually everything else but religion because religiously faith itself is actually sentient. Faith the size of a mustard seed can move mountains. I think somehow faith and the holy spirit are tight with each other. Faith in this case doesn't exist in a vacuum (except for religious astronauts doing spacewalks) and faith knows and cares whether or not you actually believe or just say you do.

Furthermore, and elaborating on faith not existing in a vacuum, if you actually have faith and actually understand and have internalized Jesus' message your actions will reflect that. You can't actually have faith, proclaim that you believe Jesus was the son of God and savior of mankind and still be a dick to people. If you believe you will be drawn towards loving and helping your fellow man and the least of your brothers. Likewise, abstaining from these behaviors would indicate you lack faith and your words are as empty as your heart. Simply put, you are playing Pascal's wager (poorly) and simply saying you have faith because you are scared of Hell.


What does everyone else think with regards to faith and evidence and religion?
 
2013-04-26 12:23:28 PM  

CrazyCracka420: [s22.postimg.org image 280x384]


s21.postimg.org


profile.ak.fbcdn.net

\subtle?
 
2013-04-26 12:24:30 PM  

ciberido: Uchiha_Cycliste: NOOOOOOOOOO I refreshed and no new comments. Wat do? need mind occupyinng

Shhhhh.... everybody keep hiding from UC.  We can post after he leaves.


*sniffle* you bastards! I knew it!
 
2013-04-26 12:35:16 PM  

Ranger Rover: The biggest difference, though, is that science is dynamic and tends to reverse itself in the face of irrefutable proof, whereas religious beliefs are static - based on incontrovertible truths - and don't. What would you say to that?

-=-
I would say "Follow the money".

In both situations there are cases (no, not going to cite them) where truth and logic get tossed for the sake of money, and with it comes "control" in some form or fashion.

We know what is causing cancer, but it would cause economic hardships on the profiteers of such items that they throw money (a monkey wrench) into the machine to have a preferred outcome of continuation, rather than the logical one of regulation or cancellation.

We know religion has it's great points such as caring for the elderly, helping those who can't help themselves, etc. (what I would call "purpose"), but there are those who will twist it to benefit them over the purpose. They have to drive fine cars, eat very well, have gold plated faucets in the bathroom, travel first class and stay at the best hotels, all the while causing hate, division and fear among and from the believers, sucking money from them and using it to fund their aberrant behavior.

People, usually the ones making the money, are the cause of the rest of us having to ingest the cancerous "bad" we know is there and try to avoid. (It's not the gun the shoots a person, but the one pulling the trigger.)

Science is your friend. Doing good, in the name of religion (if you must), is also your friend.
But YOU MUST be aware of those who will cause them to be your enemy.
 
2013-04-26 12:40:22 PM  
errr....
(It's not the gun that shoots a person, but the one pulling the trigger.)
 
2013-04-26 12:45:32 PM  
ah the South. back in the 80's when I was in high school, the snap response was "PROVE IT!". Also, "Dinosaurs were made up by scientists to fool people."  I guess these days they accept that dinosaurs actually existed, but were wiped out by the flood.

Funny how the dressing changes over time but the underpinnings stay the same. The Southern fundies used to be vocally anti-semitic back in the day, but now it's all rah rah Israel. The sentiment only goes so far (since they really want war in the Middle East to bring on the Rapture).
 
2013-04-26 12:51:09 PM  

give me doughnuts: a_real_human_being: /personally, I believe the rise in radical atheism has contributed the rise of creationism in the U.S.

I think you've got it backwards.


img13.imageshack.us

Indeed, it's surely a reciprocal relationship, with both sides contributing to the rise of the other.

/worth clarifying
//thx
 
2013-04-26 12:53:48 PM  

a_real_human_being: give me doughnuts: a_real_human_being: /personally, I believe the rise in radical atheism has contributed the rise of creationism in the U.S.

I think you've got it backwards.

[img13.imageshack.us image 320x301]

Indeed, it's surely a reciprocal relationship, with both sides contributing to the rise of the other.

/worth clarifying
//thx


radical atheism? What, like not giving a fark as hard as you can?
 
2013-04-26 12:54:40 PM  

CeroX: StandsWithAFist: logical rant...

\csb:
I also came to this realization when I did a 2 week trip to the bush a couple years ago. 2 day survival class (which was just refresher course for me) and 9 days in the bush. Tools were limited to what you can carry, and you come to realize that nature (and thus the universe) just is. There were no messengers, no angels, no spirits, no divine guidance. It just is, and it is beautiful. Living in modern society doesn't let you see that perspective. You see everyday the influence of man on the world and think there is a purpose, some goal, and because of that, people look to the heavens for answers. But out there, with a handful of people or alone by yourself and you are hungry because you haven't eaten in 2 days, you are tired and exhausted because you've been walking up and down hills and through knee deep bush and bramble and it begins to sink in. God isn't going to send a beaver or a deer your way because you pray for it. You have to rely on yourself, your skills, and your training to get you to the next step, and when rather or not you live or die nature is there, and your presence makes no difference and THAT'S the moment you realize that you must make your own way and survival is up to you and you only. You live, you die, and and you will likely be forgotten by both man, and the universe.
\end CSB


That was beautifully said.

/agree totally
//wouldn't survive 4 hours in the bush
 
2013-04-26 12:59:18 PM  

mikefinch: The whole idea behind a god is a creature that lives above and beyond reality.


1) You seem to have missed that I am limiting my discussion to the biblical god.  The biblical god is not a 'creature' because a 'creature' is something that was created.

2) Unless you can provide objective evidence that anything exists 'outside of reality', then the only rational course is to disregard that phrase as meaningless word salad.

3)  If the biblical god is not subject to the law A=A, then every statement made about that god is equally and simultaneously true AND false.

4)  I also noticed that you seem to have no interest in attempting to provide us with an operational definition of "existence" which could include the biblical god but exclude any other fictional entity.  (shrug)  Not surprising.
 
2013-04-26 01:00:53 PM  

Uchiha_Cycliste: What does everyone else think with regards to faith and evidence and religion?


Webster's dictionary defines faith, in part, as: "firm belief in something for which there is no proof". And this makes sense, as such a strong position would be required for the concept of faith to differentiate itself from related concepts (e.g., hope).

I think the problem comes into view with the more colloquial uses of the word. For instance, people may cling to individual pieces of supportive evidence, while ignoring others that dispute it ("confirmation bias" in psychology) and then claim that they have "faith" that their position will be verified one day. Technically, once you make use of evidence to support your belief, it no longer qualifies as faith, you are now engaged in the scientific method. Indeed, the process of having faith is the opposite of the scientific method.
 
2013-04-26 01:01:46 PM  

mikefinch: Just because something is outside reality doesn not imply it doesnt exist.


Finally - yes, it most certainly does.  Words mean things.  Perhaps your error lies in not grasping this simple fact.
 
2013-04-26 01:04:19 PM  
i14.photobucket.com


i14.photobucket.com

i14.photobucket.com
 
2013-04-26 01:08:20 PM  

Uchiha_Cycliste: What does everyone else think with regards to faith and evidence and religion?


Hebrews 11:1King James Version (KJV)

11Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

According to the bible, faith IS evidence.
 
2013-04-26 01:12:30 PM  

PunGent: Just started watching Treme.  Interesting series, but kinda rough...how accurate is it?


It's extremely accurate. They even get the accents right, where every other film/tv portrays us as having a thick Southern drawl. In fact, the series is so rife with little details that only a local would catch, the series can be slow-moving for everyone else.
 
2013-04-26 01:13:46 PM  
I remember when Saturn had 5 rings.  It was on the test.
 
2013-04-26 01:17:22 PM  

Uchiha_Cycliste: a_real_human_being: give me doughnuts: a_real_human_being: /personally, I believe the rise in radical atheism has contributed the rise of creationism in the U.S.

I think you've got it backwards.

[img13.imageshack.us image 320x301]

Indeed, it's surely a reciprocal relationship, with both sides contributing to the rise of the other.

/worth clarifying
//thx

radical atheism? What, like not giving a fark as hard as you can?


img835.imageshack.us
I think there's often confusion around what it means to be an "atheist", at least colloquially. For instance, someone who is a devout Christian might claim that I'm an "atheist" because, when it comes to all man-made, religious explanations of the origins of the Universe, I believe they are all false. However, technically, that's not an "atheist". As Webster's suggests, an atheist is: "one who believes that there is no deity."

As I'm a firm believer in the scientific method, I reject man-made tales of religious origins because there is no evidence for them (there is as much evidence for Christianity as there is for Scientology as there is for the Flying Spaghetti Monster). But disbelieving in the story of Scientology, for instance, doesn't make someone an atheist. Again, due to the scientific method, I cannot categorically state that there is NO "diety", because: (a) that's an INSANELY vague statement. (b) there's no convincing evidence one way or the other.

Accordingly, in my opinion, those who are entrenched in the scientific method have only one scientifically reasonable position: Agnosticism. Of course, by taking this position, one is perfectly able to refute and disbelieve all man-made religious explanations for the origin of the universe. So that's the separation that I was making between "atheism" (relative atheism, actually agnostic) and "radical atheism" (absolute atheism)
 
2013-04-26 01:25:36 PM  

Ed Grubermann: Gordon Bennett:  so let's take the evangelical christian view as given, at least the core of it and forgive my jewish arse for getting a detail wrong -

Chrsitians have no farking idea how their theology works due to it being a religion by committee. A camel of a faith, you might say. Things were so bad that the Catholic Church invented Limbo for all those unbaptized babies to keep the distraught mothers from telling the Pope to go fark himself. They've tried bolting on other exceptions, such as the Noble Savage idea that people who never heard The Word could not be condemned as they had not refused salvation.

The thing is, until recently, you didn't question the leaders of your church under pain of excommunication or death. Now that religions have been castrated and muzzled in the west, people can question their church leaders and the accumulated cruft of thousands of years of "because I said so!!!!" is breaking the camel's poor back.


that right there is a bunch of intellectual dishonesty being spewed all over.

I can refute your entire argument by a single fact. Christians in islamic or other countries where Christianity is highly oppressed.

Farkers tend to view Christianity from the very myopic aspect of the average Christian living in present day America and formed negative opinions strictly based on that.

If only they are even semi aware or cognizant of what Christians in other countries and especially those in highly oppressive states go through on a daily basis they opinion of Christianity and Christians will surely change.
 
2013-04-26 01:41:21 PM  

miss diminutive: CeroX: StandsWithAFist: logical rant...

\csb:
I also came to this realization when I did a 2 week trip to the bush a couple years ago. 2 day survival class (which was just refresher course for me) and 9 days in the bush. Tools were limited to what you can carry, and you come to realize that nature (and thus the universe) just is. There were no messengers, no angels, no spirits, no divine guidance. It just is, and it is beautiful. Living in modern society doesn't let you see that perspective. You see everyday the influence of man on the world and think there is a purpose, some goal, and because of that, people look to the heavens for answers. But out there, with a handful of people or alone by yourself and you are hungry because you haven't eaten in 2 days, you are tired and exhausted because you've been walking up and down hills and through knee deep bush and bramble and it begins to sink in. God isn't going to send a beaver or a deer your way because you pray for it. You have to rely on yourself, your skills, and your training to get you to the next step, and when rather or not you live or die nature is there, and your presence makes no difference and THAT'S the moment you realize that you must make your own way and survival is up to you and you only. You live, you die, and and you will likely be forgotten by both man, and the universe.
\end CSB

That was beautifully said.

/agree totally
//wouldn't survive 4 hours in the bush


Yeah, that's a great way of putting it. I had a similar experience reading "Shake Hands with the Devil", although it was a vicarious experience - through the stories of the victims of the massacre. For instance, dozens of Tutsi families congregating in a church, hoping to survive the onslaught. Hutu rebels become aware of this, go to the church, and cut off the genitals of the children while their parents watch, minutes before slitting all their throats. And, of course, the whole world watched this unfold, relatively indifferent to it all, only to forget the whole thing after the next episode of their favourite TV show.
 
2013-04-26 01:55:24 PM  

ciberido: Unless, maybe, your evidence is a Babel fish.


Wasn't it actually Douglas Adams who defined (or re-iterated) faith as "belief in the absence of proof?" Always liked that one.
 
2013-04-26 02:02:47 PM  

shortymac: There is absolutely no reason why you can't believe in God and also acknowledge the scientific basis of evolution. NONE!


You try telling a fundie, "hey, what if natural selection and evolution are the means through which God acts on Earth to enact His will?". The look you get in response is somewhere between "you raped my cat", "you drank my last beer while nuking Israel", and "did you just speak Old Church Slavonic?".
 
2013-04-26 02:25:30 PM  

a_real_human_being: Yeah, that's a great way of putting it. I had a similar experience reading "Shake Hands with the Devil", although it was a vicarious experience - through the stories of the victims of the massacre. For instance, dozens of Tutsi families congregating in a church, hoping to survive the onslaught. Hutu rebels become aware of this, go to the church, and cut off the genitals of the children while their parents watch, minutes before slitting all their throats. And, of course, the whole world watched this unfold, relatively indifferent to it all, only to forget the whole thing after the next episode of their favourite TV show.



Simply put, we humans are capable of great and terrible things, some of which are both, neither of which could happen without us...
 
2013-04-26 02:31:29 PM  

Gordon Bennett: Awright farkers, please forgive me for mistakes in this post but i'm getting a migraine and am half-blind from the aura at the moment. but this has seriously bugged me for a long time and i've never received a good answer.

so let's take the evangelical christian view as given, at least the core of it and forgive my jewish arse for getting a detail wrong -

1 - god is loving, caring and benevolent, if perhaps a wee bit tempermantal or murderous at times.
2 - god created the universe and mankind about 6000 years ago
3 - shortly afterwards, adam and eve ate the apple and thus doomed all mankind to sin, and thus to eternal suffering in the afterlife unless they were saved.
4 - said salvation was given by his son, jesus, through his sacrifice about 2000 years ago. only through faith in jesus can sin be forgiven and humans can escape hell and enter heaven.

the problem i have is that there is a pretty big gap between creation, or even the fall - even start with god rebooting the earth with the flood, and the appearance of jesus. in that time, there was no means of salvation. so that means that everyone must have been condemned to hell.

everyone! that means everyone in the old testament, including the prophets. Abraham must be suffering in hell, as must noah, isaac, even moses was able to, thanks to god, lead the hebrews out of slavery and to the promised land, but still with no jesus not a one of them could escape the fires of hell.

plus don't forget the others around. socrates, plato, aristotle, lao-tzu, confucious, all the great thinkers, the poets, the engineers and mathematicians who built civilisation, who looked up in wonder at the universe, who built the great library at alexandria, all roasting in hell because they had the misfortune to die before jesus.

and that's just the locals. what about, say, the ones living in the americas? they had no way of learning about jesus and the one and only chance at salvation until after columbus. and what about the ones in o ...


It depends on the exact sect of Christianity, there's some that believe as long as you're a good person you get into heaven or a very brief stint in purgatory. Mormons believe that post-mortom baptisum works.

The traditional thinking is:

Everyone who died before Jesus (except for certain Jewish prophets like Moses) or people who never heard the "word of god" souls are "sleeping" in a limbo-like place. Upon Judgement Day the dead souls will rise and everyone will be judged in accordance to their deeds.

Even more traditional medieval thinking is that everyone's soul is "sleeping" in that limbo-like place and will only be awakened on Judgement Day.
 
2013-04-26 02:35:02 PM  

lordaction: This is great news.  Ever since the cultural marxists took God out of the classroom the education system has crumbled.  Coincidence?


You really need some new material.
 
2013-04-26 02:38:06 PM  

a_real_human_being: As Webster's suggests, an atheist is: "one who believes that there is no deity."


Yeah, but I prefer the OED definition instead: a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods...

Again, due to the scientific method, I cannot categorically state that there is NO "diety", because: (a) that's an INSANELY vague statement. (b) there's no convincing evidence one way or the other.

It's not about stating categorically what the absolute reality of the situation is, but merely about stating your belief about what the situation is... I think most of us atheists are indeed agnostic as well... We don't claim absolute knowledge that there's no god... We just don't believe in one... Many of us may even actively disbelieve that there are any at all... But, you show us some evidence of one, and we might change our minds... Until then, we'll choose to believe there's probably not one... Just like we go on believing there's probably no bigfoot or Loch Ness Monster, even though there could possibly be...
 
2013-04-26 02:40:03 PM  

Keizer_Ghidorah: lordaction: This is great news.  Ever since the cultural marxists took God out of the classroom the education system has crumbled.  Coincidence?

You really need some new material.


No I don't.  Liberals believe in moral relativity and that is one of the things I am fighting against.
 
2013-04-26 02:45:20 PM  

lordaction: moral relativity


It's nice to see the old canards trotted out every now and then.
 
2013-04-26 02:51:12 PM  

that bosnian sniper: shortymac: There is absolutely no reason why you can't believe in God and also acknowledge the scientific basis of evolution. NONE!

You try telling a fundie, "hey, what if natural selection and evolution are the means through which God acts on Earth to enact His will?". The look you get in response is somewhere between "you raped my cat", "you drank my last beer while nuking Israel", and "did you just speak Old Church Slavonic?".


I know I've tried, I gotta keep believing that by being polite and with gentle direction I can save people from the WHARGARBL.

/Wish me luck
 
2013-04-26 02:56:52 PM  

a_real_human_being: Uchiha_Cycliste: a_real_human_being: give me doughnuts: a_real_human_being: /personally, I believe the rise in radical atheism has contributed the rise of creationism in the U.S.

I think you've got it backwards.

[img13.imageshack.us image 320x301]

Indeed, it's surely a reciprocal relationship, with both sides contributing to the rise of the other.

/worth clarifying
//thx

radical atheism? What, like not giving a fark as hard as you can?

[img835.imageshack.us image 320x240]
I think there's often confusion around what it means to be an "atheist", at least colloquially. For instance, someone who is a devout Christian might claim that I'm an "atheist" because, when it comes to all man-made, religious explanations of the origins of the Universe, I believe they are all false. However, technically, that's not an "atheist". As Webster's suggests, an atheist is: "one who believes that there is no deity."

As I'm a firm believer in the scientific method, I reject man-made tales of religious origins because there is no evidence for them (there is as much evidence for Christianity as there is for Scientology as there is for the Flying Spaghetti Monster). But disbelieving in the story of Scientology, for instance, doesn't make someone an atheist. Again, due to the scientific method, I cannot categorically state that there is NO "diety", because: (a) that's an INSANELY vague statement. (b) there's no convincing evidence one way or the other.

Accordingly, in my opinion, those who are entrenched in the scientific method have only one scientifically reasonable position: Agnosticism. Of course, by taking this position, one is perfectly able to refute and disbelieve all man-made religious explanations for the origin of the universe. So that's the separation that I was making between "atheism" (relative atheism, actually agnostic) and "radical atheism" (absolute atheism)


cool beans. I've always heard of and referred to them as you did in the end there as agnostic and atheistic. Otherwise known as "I don't know" and "there is no god, harrumph"
 
2013-04-26 03:06:18 PM  

RobSeace: It's not about stating categorically what the absolute reality of the situation is, but merely about stating your belief about what the situation is...


Personally, I agree with Dawkins the spectrum of theistic (opposed to religious) belief is tied to the certainty with which one states there is, or is not, a god, and that statement's truth-value is actually immaterial because individuals live their lives based upon the mere  assumption of god's (in)existence.
 
2013-04-26 03:17:11 PM  
It's nice to know that this was most definitely not a Methodist or Catholic school.
 
2013-04-26 03:21:23 PM  

mikefinch: Calipataa: Try Buddhism. Seriously. It can help make peace with that terror by embracing that terror - and letting it go.

I did and it really does. I'm still a bit depressed reagrding some things but its more a thing of pity and sadness than despair. That and i had a really weird dream one night and when i awoke i just wasn't upset anymore. Like i had some sort of epiphany while sleeping.

Uchiha_Cycliste: I hope I never implied you were a bible thumper. I was raised Catholic myself and would consider myself to bee agnostic these days (or Catholic when my family asks =/) You are giving me new and different ways to approach my view of God, that's good.

mmm no worries -- i have a cold and i am aswell up far past my bedtime. You never implied i was a bible thumper -- I just didnt want to have to explain to anyone up in arms about religion that i wont defend some crazy literal interpretation of the bible.

Personally i consider myself a theist... but i had an argument with a nice SDA girl one day about whether you could call yourself a theist without honestly thinking of atheism as a viable alternative -- That is -- How could you believe in god if it was impossible for you to not believe in god? For it to be a belief it has to be an honest choice. She got pretty pissed when i suggested she had to accept that god might not exist for her to actually have faith that he did... Otherwise its indoctrinated. Its the only thing you know. How can you know if pb&j sandwiches are the best if you have never even considered putting another sandwich in your mouth and giving it an honest chance? -- Idk, i would describe my faith as a bit mystic. Buddhism is great but i wouldnt call myself a Buddhist. I like their way of looking at things though.

Uchiha_Cycliste: One final question before I leave, it appears to me both from my posts and your replies that we have limited our discussion to OT God. At this point I think it would muddy the waters substantially to discuss NT God too. Is that your reading of things as well?


Idk -- The new testament is weird. Jesus shows up and explains that everyone was taking the Torah way too litterally and they were following the law of god without following the spirit. They were loopholing god as it were. Most of what jesus says is almost heretical to allot of evangelical churches. Like when jesus said 'let he without sin cast the first stone' or when he said 'he who lives by the sword dies by the sword' or 'its not what goes into the mouth that makes the body unclean but what comes out of it' or when his diciples were pissed at the annoying kids running around and jesus said 'suffer not the little children'

Pretty much everything he said and did pointed towards an attitude of 'Hey man -- dont be such a freaking dick'.  -- Honestly -- evangelicals love to cast the first stone, they love to claim the things you put in your body like certain meats or penises make you a dirty bad person. They love getting geared up to whup infedel asses. And they like to act like being a stuffy pious bum makes you more important to god than other people.

The way i had it explained to me was that god only gave us rules we would get. The 10 commandments can be summed up in 'treat others as you would like to be treated' but in the time of moses people would have interpreted that to be something allong the lines of 'an eye for an eye'. So god dumbed down the rules in the old testament and when jesus shows up in the new testament it signals a new covenant with god.

One of the biggest most blatant errors in the bible is in the NT. (the disciples say some stuff in the books after the gospels and acts that get weird.) I think its somewhere in Corinthians but the phase is something like 'doesn't nature teach us that baldness is a shame unto women and long hair is a shame unto men?' But the thing is that that idea is very culturally inspired. Clearly evidence of the bible having stuff in it that isnt true.

Lots of dudes have long hair. In japan it was a dishonor NOT to have your hair long as a guy. I know some native dudes that only cut their hair when a family member dies. So nature does not teach us that. So we have to admit that some of the bible is culturally inspired. And if we accept that part of it is culturally inspired than we can't treat any rules in it as hard and fast. Indeed i think a huge portion of jesus's message amounted to 'the rules are there to make your life better -- not keep people down'. The bible is a history book alright and its history is that bad shiat happens and its always going to happen so stop bad shiat when you can and try not to be a source of new shiat.

Jesus always spoke in parables and metaphors -- woudnt it make sense that the book of faith god sent to the isrialites was also full of parables and metaphores?

I dunno -- just figured i would expound and tap at my keyboard for a bit and them BAM birds are singing and its light out.


I've always thought of the OT and NT as two different methods of population control. Initially we started with evil, brutish, bloody and rude folks that needed the fear of God thrust upon them so they took the approach of you better do what I say or I'm gonna farking spank you, and I'm gonna do it forever, and it's gonna suck. So you better behave or else.
 This got folks to play nice, well nicer at least, but it wasn't enough for long term survival and peace so the NT came along and tried to convince people to behave not out of fear but out of a sense of respect and love of their fellow man. Let's all get along and try to love one another right now. (Buahahhahahaha)
Ultimately God and Jesus (Ot and NT) have the same end goals, to get people to stop being dicks. But they took radically different approaches. Now, I love Jesus' style, and frankly if you internalize his basic message of treat others as you would treat yourself and love *all* others as you would your family and friends, you negate the need to set in stone a bunch of unbreakable rules. If every one looked out for and cared for one another none of the commandments would be broken anyways. However, and this is a big however, we humans have yet to demonstrate the capacity to get along in groups larger than about 3. So it seems that we really do need a bunch of unbreakable rules with a horrendous punishment reinforcing them. Which sucks, but to deny the past several thousand years of history is simply foolhardy or intentionally ignorant.
I feel that the idea of God and the reality of science are compatible only if God exercised his agency in defining the laws of physics, setting up things for the big bang and kicking it off then sitting back and relaxing. I can even imagine an afterlife and eternity and everything else existing if I abuse math to the point it runs home crying like a little biatch by saying that the afterlife simply exists in a higher dimension that encompasses the lower 4 (x,y,z,T) In the same way that calculus lets us strictly define and play with less dimensions using integrals and derivatives ans stuff I can imagine beings that exist in iono, the 6th dimension, being able to exist outside of time and space because time and space suddenly become subsets of their plane of existence and all of creation can be witnessed (or ignored) simultaneously.
 Otherwise, I can't wrap my head around the idea of eternity or how bloody boring it would be after a while.
Now, while I can imagine these things, I just have a hard time believing this is the way things actually are, and it's tons more likely that all of life that has ever existed came about by the blind application of natural selection upon replicating entities and that we made up God to explain things that science couldn't handle yet. Btu I can't go so far (yet) as to say No! There IS no god, Harumph!
 
2013-04-26 03:24:53 PM  

lordaction: Keizer_Ghidorah: lordaction: This is great news.  Ever since the cultural marxists took God out of the classroom the education system has crumbled.  Coincidence?

You really need some new material.

No I don't.  Liberals believe in moral relativity and that is one of the things I am fighting against.


Are you talking about descriptive, meta-ethical or normative moral relativism?  I would also like a citation indicating where the set of all liberals is wholly included in the set of moral relativists.
 
2013-04-26 03:28:09 PM  

kxs401: violentsalvation: I've known grown adults who believe that young earth / dinosaur shiat. They were otherwise educated, one I would go so far as to say he is brilliant, but he believes this shiat. I don't farking understand it.

I know a nuclear engineer (by training, not by profession any longer) who believes this crap. He's a religious nutball, of course. He was posting on Facebook about how it's likely that God put fossils on the Earth for his own purposes, or something. Oy.


I used to work with a guy like this and when I asked him about radio carbon dating he said that god just put it there to fool us.
I told him that god has MANY better things to do other than that. He did NOT have any answer.
 
2013-04-26 03:28:28 PM  

Calipataa: Bumblefark:

Yep, in a heartbeat. Tell me you prefer your sad little patch of earth over interstellar travel, and you get the perfunctory "Well, have a good one," as I blast off to infinity, and beyond...

I might change my mind if there are any real M-class planets out there, with crazy space mangoes growing on the space mango trees and herds of 6-legged space giraffes running majestically across the space savannas, crazy sexy blue-stripey space people, etc. If I have to live in a spaceship, I think I'd get claustrophobic after a while. And if all you've got to offer is places like Mars, well, it's still a whole less hospitable than Antarctica. :)

Milwaukee? Is there life on Milwaukee?


I am agnostic but i think if interstellar travel happened I woudl still stay here. Stupid..insane but my home it is.
Unless of course we found a planet with oceans of beer it would have to be named Milwaukee and i would swim in her golden oceans.
 
2013-04-26 03:40:40 PM  

dustygrimp: lordaction: Keizer_Ghidorah: lordaction: This is great news.  Ever since the cultural marxists took God out of the classroom the education system has crumbled.  Coincidence?

You really need some new material.

No I don't.  Liberals believe in moral relativity and that is one of the things I am fighting against.

Are you talking about descriptive, meta-ethical or normative moral relativism?  I would also like a citation indicating where the set of all liberals is wholly included in the set of moral relativists.


Citation?  Read a newspaper. The only absolutes the left has is that Islamic terrorism doesn't exist and the government should be involved in every aspect of every citizen's life.
 
2013-04-26 03:44:22 PM  

lordaction: dustygrimp: lordaction: Keizer_Ghidorah: lordaction: This is great news.  Ever since the cultural marxists took God out of the classroom the education system has crumbled.  Coincidence?

You really need some new material.

No I don't.  Liberals believe in moral relativity and that is one of the things I am fighting against.

Are you talking about descriptive, meta-ethical or normative moral relativism?  I would also like a citation indicating where the set of all liberals is wholly included in the set of moral relativists.

Citation?  Read a newspaper. The only absolutes the left has is that Islamic terrorism doesn't exist and the government should be involved in every aspect of every citizen's life.


Selective response.

/Obvious troll is obvious... and ill-prepared.
 
2013-04-26 03:47:50 PM  

dickfreckle: PunGent: Just started watching Treme.  Interesting series, but kinda rough...how accurate is it?

It's extremely accurate. They even get the accents right, where every other film/tv portrays us as having a thick Southern drawl. In fact, the series is so rife with little details that only a local would catch, the series can be slow-moving for everyone else.


I visited New Orleans a couple times before Katrina, haven't made it back since...not sure how much I want to.
 
2013-04-26 03:54:10 PM  

lordaction: dustygrimp: lordaction: Keizer_Ghidorah: lordaction: This is great news.  Ever since the cultural marxists took God out of the classroom the education system has crumbled.  Coincidence?

You really need some new material.

No I don't.  Liberals believe in moral relativity and that is one of the things I am fighting against.

Are you talking about descriptive, meta-ethical or normative moral relativism?  I would also like a citation indicating where the set of all liberals is wholly included in the set of moral relativists.

Citation?  Read a newspaper. The only absolutes the left has is that Islamic terrorism doesn't exist and the government should be involved in every aspect of every citizen's life.


First one is false, second one is the conservative mindset, especially when it comes to anything sexual.
 
2013-04-26 03:59:29 PM  
Put another way, for some reason conservatives need the fear of eternal damnation constantly reiterated in order for them to not act like dicks. What sad, sorry, scary people. That is what he's saying right?
 
2013-04-26 04:01:14 PM  

dustygrimp: lordaction: dustygrimp: lordaction: Keizer_Ghidorah: lordaction: This is great news.  Ever since the cultural marxists took God out of the classroom the education system has crumbled.  Coincidence?

You really need some new material.

No I don't.  Liberals believe in moral relativity and that is one of the things I am fighting against.

Are you talking about descriptive, meta-ethical or normative moral relativism?  I would also like a citation indicating where the set of all liberals is wholly included in the set of moral relativists.

Citation?  Read a newspaper. The only absolutes the left has is that Islamic terrorism doesn't exist and the government should be involved in every aspect of every citizen's life.

Selective response.

/Obvious troll is obvious... and ill-prepared.


It isn't a selective response.  It is not allowing you to change the conversation.  That is a favorite tactic of the left when confronted with a truth that makes them uncomfortable.  You guys immediately re-define the language used and side-track the conversation.  You know exactly what I mean.
 
2013-04-26 04:06:12 PM  

dustygrimp: Are you talking about descriptive, meta-ethical or normative moral relativism?  I would also like a citation indicating where the set of all liberals is wholly included in the set of moral relativists.


Don't need no moral relatives here in the good old US of A. I'll take a hot cousin who can suck-start Bigfoot and gets all lubed up during a 4th of July fireworks show any day of the week.

'MERICA.
 
2013-04-26 04:06:15 PM  
controversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.comcontroversy.wearscience.com
 
2013-04-26 04:08:23 PM  

CeroX: Multiple members of my family get yearly membership passes to the creation "museum" in Kentucky... Thankfully, I've never been there, and wouldn't last long if i was forced to go...

Seriously, they have a room labeled "The world without God", which features various displays like a newspaper that headlines "Children attacked by packs of wolves" and a video clip of a mother telling her 12 year old to get an abortion, Another newspaper article that reads "Homosexuals recruiting children" and a bunch of other stupid nonsense...

When my parents showed me pictures of this i turned to them and said, "Wait, isn't the whole point of fundamentalism that you believe God created the earth? Should the "World without God" exhibit actually just be a pitch black room with sensory deprivation systems so you can't see or hear ANYTHING? You know since had there been no god there would BE no world?

Her response:  "Well it's just an exhibit"

I love my family, but they are buying into this garbage...


This made me cry, for a religion that emphasizes love and peace so many of it's believers do nothing but spew hate.
 
2013-04-26 04:10:44 PM  

a_real_human_being ....
Accordingly, in my opinion, those who are entrenched in the scientific method have only one scientifically reasonable position: Agnosticism. Of course, by taking this position, one is perfectly able to refute and disbelieve all man-made religious explanations for the origin of the universe. So that's the separation that I was making between "atheism" (relative atheism, actually agnostic) and "radical atheism" (absolute atheism)


Fanatical atheists (yes, there are) probably dislike agnostics more than theists because they think they are "on the fence".


I've had many people be like "Really? You're agnostic?  I thought you were smarter than that." without a hint of irony.

 
Displayed 50 of 464 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report