Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Why we should not expect many if any Creationists
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 61 of 107 (782446)
04-23-2016 1:16 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by Faith
04-23-2016 11:48 AM


Re: RCC vs true Christianity
[ Content hidden. --Admin ]
Edited by Admin, : Hide content.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by Faith, posted 04-23-2016 11:48 AM Faith has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


(1)
Message 62 of 107 (782447)
04-23-2016 1:26 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by Faith
04-23-2016 11:48 AM


Respecting Religious Beliefs
quote:
Yes I knew when I wrote it that I was setting up that very response. Interesting that the same logic applies whether the belief system is true or false.
it isn't really interesting, just giving you the benefit of the doubt. You see you didn't make that distinction - and if you did the question arises of who gets to decide which belief systems are true ? You would be reduced to special pleading or evading the question pretty quickly because yet the belief you don't want contradicted is pretty clearly false to most of us here.
One day you really ought to try and grasp one basic fact about principles - if you really believe in a principle you don't apply it only when it is convenient for you. That's why the ACLU will defend the rights of people that they disagree with - it's a stand on principle.
And that is something that deserves more respect than a mere belief.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by Faith, posted 04-23-2016 11:48 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by Faith, posted 04-23-2016 1:54 PM PaulK has not replied
 Message 73 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-28-2016 8:50 PM PaulK has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 63 of 107 (782448)
04-23-2016 1:54 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by PaulK
04-23-2016 1:26 PM


Re: Respecting Religious Beliefs
YOu are right, I didn't make that distinction and didn't think I could make it in a way anyone would accept anyway. I recognized the principle of course, silly to think otherwise. But that's okay, I reviewed Admin's post and see we're off topic.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by PaulK, posted 04-23-2016 1:26 PM PaulK has not replied

  
Aussie
Member
Posts: 275
From: FL USA
Joined: 10-02-2006


Message 64 of 107 (782590)
04-26-2016 10:37 AM
Reply to: Message 60 by Faith
04-23-2016 11:48 AM


Re: RCC vs true Christianity
All that should be evidence that Catholicism is not based on the Bible and therefore not Christian.
I actually agree with your previous post. These are their sincerely held beliefs. This is disrespectful.

"...heck is a small price to pay for the truth"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by Faith, posted 04-23-2016 11:48 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by Faith, posted 04-26-2016 10:42 AM Aussie has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 65 of 107 (782592)
04-26-2016 10:42 AM
Reply to: Message 64 by Aussie
04-26-2016 10:37 AM


Re: RCC vs true Christianity
Yes I guess you can disrespect my beliefs too then because I'm not going to call the RCC Christian when its "sincerely held beliefs" are predominantly pagan. Being respectful, however, shouldn't require a person to lie and call a pagan belief system Christian. I just feel sorry for Catholics and the reason I constantly bring up this subject is in the hope that some who are trusting in that false religion might wake up and be saved.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by Aussie, posted 04-26-2016 10:37 AM Aussie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by Tangle, posted 04-27-2016 6:34 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 67 by Aussie, posted 04-27-2016 12:52 PM Faith has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


(1)
Message 66 of 107 (782652)
04-27-2016 6:34 AM
Reply to: Message 65 by Faith
04-26-2016 10:42 AM


Re: RCC vs true Christianity
Faith writes:
Yes I guess you can disrespect my beliefs too
Just for the record, disrespecting views/opinions/beliefs is not the same as disrespecting the holder of those beliefs. If it was no one would be able to challenge anything. It's a common method of attempting to shut down a debate - but it's not going to work in this place.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.
Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by Faith, posted 04-26-2016 10:42 AM Faith has not replied

  
Aussie
Member
Posts: 275
From: FL USA
Joined: 10-02-2006


(2)
Message 67 of 107 (782674)
04-27-2016 12:52 PM
Reply to: Message 65 by Faith
04-26-2016 10:42 AM


Re: RCC vs true Christianity
Yes I guess you can disrespect my beliefs too then because I'm not going to call the RCC Christian when its "sincerely held beliefs" are predominantly pagan.
Stop confusing disrespect with disbelief. You all (believers of every religion) cling to your "Faith" to believe what you do because there is no other reason to believe. I have Christian friends whom I love and hold the deepest respect for, yet disbelieve their religious views. I've told you in the past of my many Hindu and Muslim students. All of you...every last one of you...has faith that what they believe is the Universal Reality.
I have a reasonably high index of confidence that all my friends' "Sincerely held religious beliefs," including yours, are predominantly imaginary.
Edited by Aussie, : Spelling...

"...heck is a small price to pay for the truth"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by Faith, posted 04-26-2016 10:42 AM Faith has not replied

  
AdminPhat
Inactive Member


Message 68 of 107 (782676)
04-27-2016 3:09 PM


Back On Topic
This thread is wandering off topic. The original topic is as follows:
quote:
find it amazing that there have been any Creationists at EvC for at least a decade and honestly there is no longer any reason to expect Creationists to come here.
The issue is settled.
Young Earth is dead; it has been totally and completely refuted.
Old Earth Creationism is simply unsupportable and has been for many decades.
Creationists know this. That is why the trend in "Biblical Christianity" and the Christian Cult of Ignorance has been separation, avoidance and isolation for over a quarter century now,
They have their own school systems, their own colleges, their own accreditation boards, their own TV and radio stations and networks, their own browsers that filter out any ideas that might disagree with their own propaganda.
The product they try to market simply cannot compete in the world of reality and ideas.
Edited by AdminPhat, : No reason given.
Edited by AdminPhat, : No reason given.

  • Please stay on topic for a thread. Open a new thread for new topics.
  • Points should be supported with evidence and reasoned argumentation.
  • The sincerely held beliefs of other members deserve your respect. Please keep discussion civil. Argue the position, not the person.

  •   
    Dawn Bertot
    Member
    Posts: 3571
    Joined: 11-23-2007


    Message 69 of 107 (782777)
    04-28-2016 7:34 PM
    Reply to: Message 44 by Percy
    04-22-2016 6:41 AM


    Re: It's not the Internet that's Changed
    Percy
    Putting aside your and the others arrogance
    There are very specific reasons other than you have won, why creationist do not continue
    It is equally true that you fellas generally do not follow where evidence leads
    Arguments reach a logical empass and it has nothing to do with you winning the argument
    As I've stated to many times to mention with no fear of contradiction
    Creation and design are not religious or biblical issues anymore than how the universe began, is a biologicalmy based evolution issue
    Origins, creation or so called natural causes fall to logical arguments based on logical allowances and reality
    Since design or creation are one of only two possibiltes and design is very much a part of that possibility it can and is a very real scientifically established proposition
    Here the argument ends and support begins
    Specific revelation only supports that naturally scientifically established proposition
    However Once we see that you are not actually following the evidence where it leads the conversation really ends
    The rest is just commentary
    You can't win something you can't answer yes even your arrogant pompous individuals
    This however has nothing to with the misconception that design and creation are not science
    Your so-called Scientific Method ignores the basics of reason and actual science
    I'll be happy to restate these If need be
    If you don't like the Biblical explanation of creation simply remember you and I were not there and trying to find how it happened will not work by looking at present factors. It will only move you backwards to a place where it still has no answer
    But remember neither proposition is based INITIALLY on your so-called SM or even the Biblical account but it is based on what reality based logic will allow
    This is why the Bible even claims the same in
    Romans 1:20
    While there may be a certain iorny in quoting the Bible, it's actually telling you what I am elaborately stating, it, the Bible is telling you how science, at least respecting origins actually works
    Science it up if you want but at least proceed in a logical fashion
    Dawn Bertot
    Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 44 by Percy, posted 04-22-2016 6:41 AM Percy has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 79 by Percy, posted 04-29-2016 7:51 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

      
    Dawn Bertot
    Member
    Posts: 3571
    Joined: 11-23-2007


    Message 70 of 107 (782778)
    04-28-2016 7:44 PM
    Reply to: Message 44 by Percy
    04-22-2016 6:41 AM


    Re: It's not the Internet that's Changed
    A science that is logically and realty based has nothing to do with myth or stories
    The fact of a designed and created universe is primarily reason based, on reality based reasons, set out in logical propositions
    If any person thinks I'm incorrect please by all means let them step up an demonstrate otherwise
    No one is afraid to debate it and you certain haven't won anything
    You can simply demonstrate otherwise or you can't
    I simply got tired of waiting for an actual debate
    Dawn Bertot
    Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 44 by Percy, posted 04-22-2016 6:41 AM Percy has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 80 by Percy, posted 04-29-2016 7:52 AM Dawn Bertot has not replied

      
    Dawn Bertot
    Member
    Posts: 3571
    Joined: 11-23-2007


    Message 71 of 107 (782779)
    04-28-2016 7:59 PM
    Reply to: Message 44 by Percy
    04-22-2016 6:41 AM


    Re: It's not the Internet that's Changed
    Now watch how I proceed anticipating anticipating your next objection
    Youll say
    It's not that we , the SM disallow creation but that it's simply not science based
    Ah but as I have demonstrated it is more scientifically based than any proposition , principle or observation
    Then you say we cant allow it in school because it's not science based
    But as I have demonstrated to many times to mention it can only be science based, there is no other way to perceive it
    When I am offered no argument to the contrary is there a reason to continue, really
    Dawn Bertot
    Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 44 by Percy, posted 04-22-2016 6:41 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

      
    Dawn Bertot
    Member
    Posts: 3571
    Joined: 11-23-2007


    Message 72 of 107 (782780)
    04-28-2016 8:27 PM
    Reply to: Message 44 by Percy
    04-22-2016 6:41 AM


    Re: It's not the Internet that's Changed
    Only the simplest of minds would assume that disagreeing or disreguarding the Biblical account of creation, is somehow tantamount to disproving creationism, young or old earth
    The same would be true of a person that disreguarded the totality of the general and overwhelimg evidence that supports the Bibles veracity
    Not having all or some of the creation account in the Bible, which may not have been provided is not the same as demonstrating it as false, inaccurate or not to be believed
    But to reiterate, that is a separate issue as To wheather creation is scientific or evidential
    The usual tactic of the evolutionist or skeptic is to get the creationist or design exponent tied up in some specific biological detail, unwaringly causing them to ignore any of the basics of the actual arguments
    I am certain this explains the Whys of the fact that creationist do not remain
    You have assumed you have won something you haven't even started
    But if you think I'm wrong let that person step up
    Dawn Bertot
    Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
    Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 44 by Percy, posted 04-22-2016 6:41 AM Percy has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 81 by Percy, posted 04-29-2016 8:04 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

      
    Dawn Bertot
    Member
    Posts: 3571
    Joined: 11-23-2007


    Message 73 of 107 (782781)
    04-28-2016 8:50 PM
    Reply to: Message 62 by PaulK
    04-23-2016 1:26 PM


    Re: Respecting Religious Beliefs
    Good advise Paulk about holding principles only when it is convenient.
    Much like the principle of the scientific Method, holding only, when it is convinent to exclude actual evidence as to what constitutes science
    Which further helps it and is convenient to exclude creation as science and how the creation principle is established
    Well thank you Paulk for that sound advice
    Are you following your own advice?
    Dawn Bertot

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 62 by PaulK, posted 04-23-2016 1:26 PM PaulK has not replied

      
    Dawn Bertot
    Member
    Posts: 3571
    Joined: 11-23-2007


    Message 74 of 107 (782782)
    04-28-2016 9:04 PM
    Reply to: Message 1 by jar
    04-12-2016 9:04 AM


    And BTW The thread title is inaccurate and nearly nonsensical
    The term Creation does not refer to a group of people that believe it, it is a principle like that of gravity or design
    It's a science ,based on reality and logic, not a group of people.
    We simply discovered it we didn't invent it. We could not discover it if it we're not science based.
    Dawn Bertot .
    Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
    Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1 by jar, posted 04-12-2016 9:04 AM jar has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 75 by jar, posted 04-28-2016 9:09 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

      
    jar
    Member (Idle past 393 days)
    Posts: 34026
    From: Texas!!
    Joined: 04-20-2004


    Message 75 of 107 (782783)
    04-28-2016 9:09 PM
    Reply to: Message 74 by Dawn Bertot
    04-28-2016 9:04 PM


    Learn to read Dawn
    Learn to read Dawn, I used the term Creationists not Creation.

    Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 74 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-28-2016 9:04 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 76 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-28-2016 9:16 PM jar has replied

      
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.2
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024