Thread: Debunking Dangerously Deceitful Dogma

Originally Posted by Tony Miller

Xman,
My reply was basically to both sides of the battle, science and religion. Not to either of you specifically. Both sides seem to disrespect each other in these discussions. A different side may start it each time but the end result is the same. Both sides insist on being right, whether in this incident, the one before it, or the next one to follow. No one will know who is right till the end, if there is an end.

FWIW, neither of you guys are on my ignore list

Tony

Mr. Miller your ecumenical attitude in this matter is as good and well thought out as the craftsmanship of your strops.

As an atheist I feel and understand the frustration and irritation at the hyper-evangelical stance some, but certainly not all, Christians take. It's easy to get in a combative mode and keep the switch turned on. But at the same time it must be remembered if you wish respect it's a good idea to give it.

I thought the initial question of whom or what someone prays to was an interesting one, but with a guarded eye, because in my experience the next question isn't one of inquiry but one of my eternal soul and how the particular way he or she prays to Gawd is the one, true way to avoid eternal burning in their particular view of hell.

The thread turned into another, "yeah... but" sort of discussion.

I think both sides of the argument would do well to adopt Tony Miller's stance on the topic. And I wish everyone would undo the ignore buttons. Because we all can agree on how to get a darn fine shave.

So far this thread really hasn't devolved, in my opinion. Its gotten a little heated, but not too bad.

Now as far as the different criticisms go, no one has been disrespectful of the various religions and their beliefs, nor I think, towards anyone else in the thread. However, people (including myself) have been derisive towards Creationism, which is not a religious belief, but a belief spawned from religion, and, as I have just found out, an idea that has been rejected by pretty much all religious branches, to the extent that now the Vatican is claiming that ideas of evolution can be traced to early church scholars (I'm pleased that they've accepted evolution, so I wont point out some problems with this).

As I stated earlier, Creationism and Evolution are not two competing systems of belief. Evolution is a robust scientific theory that is well proven by a great deal of evidence. It is not a "matter of belief" any more then other well proven scientific theories, such as the Copernican model of the solar system, plate tectonics, or any of a variety of other theories. It isn't even a fringe theory, such as m-theory that, while very interesting, cannot be currently proven (though it makes a great deal of sense "fitting into things") Creationism, on the other hand, is an idea, taken from an interpretation of the bible with no proof to support it. While people are free to believe in it, I see no reason that this belief would be afforded the same protections of a persons religious belief, especially since Creationism has now been rejected by most major churches. The bible also states that Pi is 3 and the earth is the center of the universe, but if someone were to argue that either of these were true I doubt people would state that it was a matter of belief, but simply think that the person arguing it was just wrong.

As far as this thread convincing anyone, it depends on the person. If they're willing to examine evidence and question certain beliefs then it might. At the very least, they might learn a bit more about science, and that's never a bad thing.

Originally Posted by Pete_S

Especially since Creationism has now been rejected by most major churches. The bible also states that Pi is 3 and the earth is the center of the universe, but if someone were to argue that either of these were true I doubt people would state that it was a matter of belief, but simply think that the person arguing it was just wrong.

Contrary to popular belief Creationism has not been rejected by most major churches. By the catholic Church yes but not by either the major or independent Protestant Denominations.

The following definition of evolution was the 1995 official Position Statement of the American National Association of Biology Teachers and is consistent with what other major science organizations mean by evolution: "The diversity of life on earth is the outcome of evolution: an unsupervised, impersonal, unpredictable and natural process of temporal descent with genetic modification that is affected by natural selection, chance, historical contingencies and changing environments."

Unsupervised, impersonal, unpredictable is not compatible with the Creeds of Christendom in any way shape or form. "Theistic evolution" is a watering down of doctrine thus falsifying true faith in the Triune God.


The bible states that Pi is 3 is a misconception. The verse in question is --And he made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one brim to the other: it was round all about, and his height was five cubits: and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about. 1 Kings 7:23 (KJV)

Read in context this is to point to its immense size and besides that there was no standard of measure back then. A cubit or a hands breath was an approximation pending on the size of the person doing the measuring. Have you ever estimated the length of something by seeing how long it was compared to your outstretched arms? If so, then you have used "measurements" similar to those that ancient civilizations used.


The bible states the earth is the center of the universe is also a misconception. No where in Scripture is there any statement remotely fitting this description. The Book of Genesis states that our planet was created three days before the sun, moon, and stars. The purposes of the stars relate directly to the earth: to provide a calendar system (Gen. 1:14) and to declare God's glory to men (Ps. 19:1). It was once thought that the earth was physically located at the exact center of the universe, and furthermore that it did not move. We still use some of that type of language today (sun rise,sun set) Scripture does not require it and observation clearly shows the earth's movement.

There is many misconceptions about the Bible and I will address them when they show up here. Since I am one of the ignorant, unthinking, unquestioning few here I must at the least defend my faith and the word from which it flows.

ENUF, I'm sorry I mentioned your name in the initial post, I shouldn't have. I'll have a mod remove it.

Alex, re. post #65, You misunderstand and misinterpret me completely, but I know you, you're a great guy.

I'm sorry if anyone finds these facts uncomfortable.

Just to be clear ... AGAIN ...

Originally Posted by xman

Not you ... You're not a liar, but the links sited are filled with deceptions ...

Originally Posted by xman

... Some are following with genuine interest and honest wonder and it is for their benefit that I supply the pathway in the three video series ...

Originally Posted by xman

... If there are any honest questions regarding the content of a specific video those can be answered here, but don't bother asking how we know it to be true ...

To sum up, another video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WqznU...layer_embedded