Why defend ourselves

Nanfeishen

Executive Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2006
Messages
7,118
#61
(yeah go ahead and try flame my intellegence if you want)
I might flame your spelling of INTELLIGENCE ;) , but i certainly dont doubt your INTELLIGENCE :D

I do notice you use the word faith , rather than belief, in your description of your relationship with your religious convictions.
It isn't something i have seen too often in many of the discussions, people tend to throw the words together, or around a little willy-nilly.
I have always looked at faith as having a trust in something , or placing your trust in something that you cant define yet has a sense of worth, or that brings peace of mind to the individual, whereas a belief to me , is something you have to think about, something the mind needs to mull over, something that stems more from the emotional side of the individual.
Faith is about having no doubt , whereas belief in and of itself has doubt, and therefore individuals who have faith in a religion, or in their religious convictions, feel secure in their belief, whereas people who have a belief in the same religion, or in their religious convictions, tend to get a bit "touchy" when their belief is questioned.
Faith provides security whereas belief is insecure.
I think for the church to grow, and move with the times so to speak, it will need to redefine the teachings in such a way as to promote the issue of faith over simply believing, to teach about faith, not trying to get people to believe in the message they wish to pass on, but to have faith in the message they are passing on. they will also need to drop the ceremony, the glitz and the glammer, and get out from behind their pulpits, come out from their buildings, and mix with the people, let the people in, show the people they are out there, not hidden inside, not hiding from the world, but a part of it.
In other words , come out of the closet:D
 

Kalvaer

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2004
Messages
3,859
#62
My spelling of the word Intelligence is Indirectly proportional to the amount vodka comsumed at the time of typing, Unfortunately, it also directly effects my Spelling at the same time :D

I must say I love the way you describe the two words and what they mean to you. More so because its so damn true and fully portrayed what I was trying to get at.. I hope the others reading this understand the significance of the words.

When writing the above I thought for a while how to best put my mind too paper in a way that could not be mis-interpreted. Especially since the debate about "belief" and "non-belief" earlier. Using belief to explain my understanding, and Faith to explain my convictions seemed the logical way without having people cut and paste and mis-quote what I had said

What you have explained for the church to do to fix its mistakes though.. I dont think ... no... I dont believe I could have said it in a better way :).

I also just wish the "Church" could see what you have typed and understand it as easily... maybe they do.. the problem is how the whole world would react. More than likely because of todays times and the world we live in, it would be questioned and destroyed in a manner quicker than any athiest could dream of :(

Anyway, It time to hit the sack before the wife hits me over the head with the vodka bottle and drags me to bed, and then too show my young cousin who turns 18 today (Saturday) what a real headache is all about (his father did it me on mine so its only fair that return the favour)

Hopefully the forums wont be over run with spam when I get back on Monday.. and Have a great weekend everyone

edit Ninja edited to correct spelling and wording that didn't make sense.. still more but i'm late and need to leave
 
Last edited:
Joined
Dec 13, 2006
Messages
5,776
#63
I might flame your spelling of INTELLIGENCE ;) , but i certainly dont doubt your INTELLIGENCE :D

In other words , come out of the closet:D
I believe this thread can accommodate my quote. QUOTE:

“Secular humanists tend to speak out both sides of their mouths. We have heard them make comments that Christians are not tolerant of other people's beliefs. But will they ever be tolerant of Christian's beliefs?

One time I asked a non Christian (secular humanist) high school teacher if he would like to hear a creation scientist speak on the scientific evidences that this world was created. He said to me that he does not want to hear someone thump him with the Bible. I would like to of said to him. "You mean that you thump school kids with Darwinism (evolution origin species thumper) 5 days out of the week and you are not open minded enough to hear the other view point for 1 hour?"

You see when you do not have Jesus Christ in your heart you are not able to think rationally. This is just one of the many reasons why I don't want to be a humanist (non-christian)

One time I asked a school teacher if I could speak on Creation Science in his class. He said to me that if I spoke they would have to invite someone else to speak that believes in evolution to GIVE EQUAL TIME. I thought..... equal time! you teachers thump kids with evolution 5 days a week and I just want one hour and you talk about equal time.

Here is another reason why I would rather be a Christian then a humanist. Because they are always talking about self-esteem but then they speak out the other side of their mouth and teach we all came from a monkey and the monkey got here by chance. Sounds like no purpose to me; no wonder why so many kids commit suicide.
Humanists say that Christianity is just a religion that causes people to be biased towards certain things. If that is true, then why are most atheists, communists, socialists, nazis, cultists, occultists, and humanists all evolutionists. BOTTOM LINE: evolution is a biased religious belief.
At the time The Origin of Species was published about half of all surgical patients typically died from infections which physicians assumed arose spontaneously. It was the work of creationists like Louis Pasteur (1822-1895) and Joseph Lister (1827-1912) that proved infections are always spread, leading to the modern concept of sterile technique.

Evolutionists were slow to accept this discovery because evolution, ruling out creation by God, requires that life can arise by itself. IT IS A FACT WHAT YOU BELIEVE ABOUT ORIGINS DICTATES HOW WISE OR UNWISE YOU WILL THINK ABOUT LIFE. THAT IS ANOTHER REASON WHY I AM GLAD I AM A CHRISTIAN.

Evolutionists will swallow the idea that Mars had a world wide flood with no evidence of water on the planet. Yet (they will strain at the idea that the Earth experienced a world wide flood) the Earth is covered with 2/3 water and yet it is a fact that if all the mountains were pushed down and the ocean basins were lifted up the whole earth would be covered again with water at least a mile and a half deep.

THAT IS WHY I AM GLAD TO BE A CHRISTAN, SO I DON'T STRAIN AT A NAT AND SWALLOW A CAMEL.”

I apologise that part of dodo’s quote is included,find the quote www.davidgoliathministries.com .
 

Neo

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2005
Messages
1,168
#64
“Secular humanists tend to speak out both sides of their mouths. We have heard them make comments that Christians are not tolerant of other people's beliefs. But will they ever be tolerant of Christian's beliefs?
The difference is when atheists argue a point, the tend to use scientific method. And it stays an arguement. Fundamentalists threatens with ever lasting damnation in hell if you don't agree with them.
You see when you do not have Jesus Christ in your heart you are not able to think rationally. This is just one of the many reasons why I don't want to be a humanist (non-christian)
In other words you don't tolerate their thinking, exactly what you accuse the secular humanists of, above.
Here is another reason why I would rather be a Christian then a humanist. Because they are always talking about self-esteem but then they speak out the other side of their mouth and teach we all came from a monkey and the monkey got here by chance. Sounds like no purpose to me; no wonder why so many kids commit suicide.
Now you're just talking nonsense. If you want to argue, use concrete statements, that at least have some base.
Humanists say that Christianity is just a religion that causes people to be biased towards certain things. If that is true, then why are most atheists, communists, socialists, nazis, cultists, occultists, and humanists all evolutionists. BOTTOM LINE: evolution is a biased religious belief.
Please proof this statement. I always thought most Nazi's were Christians, for example? (two can play this game....)
At the time The Origin of Species was published about half of all surgical patients typically died from infections which physicians assumed arose spontaneously. It was the work of creationists like Louis Pasteur (1822-1895) and Joseph Lister (1827-1912) that proved infections are always spread, leading to the modern concept of sterile technique.
What the heck has sterile conditions have to do with disproving evolution? Are you nuts?

Oh, I see. You're playing the 'my scientist is better than your scientist' game. Don't go there, thust me. Not on this forum.....
Evolutionists were slow to accept this discovery because evolution, ruling out creation by God, requires that life can arise by itself. IT IS A FACT WHAT YOU BELIEVE ABOUT ORIGINS DICTATES HOW WISE OR UNWISE YOU WILL THINK ABOUT LIFE. THAT IS ANOTHER REASON WHY I AM GLAD I AM A CHRISTIAN.
AND NOW IN ENGLISH, PLEASE? (see I can also type in caps, cool eh?)
Evolutionists will swallow the idea that Mars had a world wide flood with no evidence of water on the planet. Yet (they will strain at the idea that the Earth experienced a world wide flood) the Earth is covered with 2/3 water and yet it is a fact that if all the mountains were pushed down and the ocean basins were lifted up the whole earth would be covered again with water at least a mile and a half deep.
It's called geology, you don't have to 'strain' at any idea. You go out and look for evidence. So far, many localised floods have been discovered, but no global one. People will however 'strain' at the idea that all the creatures on the planet fitted into one boat and were tended by a few humans.
THAT IS WHY I AM GLAD TO BE A CHRISTAN, SO I DON'T STRAIN AT A NAT AND SWALLOW A CAMEL.”
Or rather, THAT IS WHY I AM GLAD TO BE A CHRISTIAN, SO I DON'T HAVE TO THINK FOR MYSELF BUT JUST ACCEPT WHATEVER I'M BRAINWASHED WITH.
 

Claymore

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Messages
7,442
#65
Evolutionists will swallow the idea that Mars had a world wide flood with no evidence of water on the planet.
Firstly, that topic would be geology, not evolution. Secondly, I don't know of any evidence to suggest Mars-wide floods. Thirdly, recent findings do support some water on Mars.

Yet (they will strain at the idea that the Earth experienced a world wide flood) the Earth is covered with 2/3 water and yet it is a fact that if all the mountains were pushed down and the ocean basins were lifted up the whole earth would be covered again with water at least a mile and a half deep.
Sure, if the earth's surface was smooth, it would be covered with water. However, the earth's surface is not smooth, has never been smooth, and there is zero evidence to suggest a world-wide flood.

In the battle of facts, you're arriving unarmed.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Dec 13, 2006
Messages
5,776
#66
Or rather, THAT IS WHY I AM GLAD TO BE A CHRISTIAN, SO I DON'T HAVE TO THINK FOR MYSELF BUT JUST ACCEPT WHATEVER I'M BRAINWASHED WITH.
YOUR QUOTE:
“The difference is when atheists argue a point, they tend to use scientific method. And it stays an arguement. Fundamentalists threatens with ever lasting damnation in hell if you don't agree with them.”
MY REPLY:
Fundamentalists threatens you… Christians however explain to you the option of eternal life or eternal death but leave the option to you.
Christians tend to explain also why the scientific metod used by the atheist is not true scientific method but rather a believe… the religion of scientism…
YOUR QUOTE:
“In other words you don't tolerate their thinking, exactly what you accuse the secular humanists of, above.”
“Or rather, THAT IS WHY I AM GLAD TO BE A CHRISTIAN, SO I DON'T HAVE TO THINK FOR MYSELF BUT JUST ACCEPT WHATEVER I'M BRAINWASHED WITH.”
MY ANSWER:
….mmm…as an atheist I consider myself tolerant reacting in this way to another man’s thinking. Proves a double standard set by non-christians…
YOUR QUOTE:
Now you're just talking nonsense. If you want to argue, use concrete statements, that at least have some base
MY QUESTION:
Why are so many kids committing suicide if there are purpose in their lifes?
YOUR QUOTE:
Please proof this statement. I always thought most Nazi's were Christians, for example
? (two can play this game....)
MY ANSWER:
Hitler a christian?...If you believe that you will be believe any fairytale…like evolution…
….may be you should read a book by corriie ten boom called The Hiding Place.
YOUR QUOTE:
“What the heck has sterile conditions have to do with disproving evolution? Are you nuts?
Oh, I see. You're playing the 'my scientist is better than your scientist' game. Don't go there, trust me. Not on this forum
AND NOW IN ENGLISH, PLEASE? (see I can also type in caps, cool eh?)”
MY ANSWER:
In plain english(I am not the scientist or bioligist), infection contradicts the origin of species because it is spread…
YOUR QUOTE:
It's called geology, you don't have to 'strain' at any idea.
MY QUESTION:
Do you strain at the idea of a global flood? How many species developed due to adaptation?... not evolution
 
Joined
Dec 13, 2006
Messages
5,776
#67
Firstly, that topic would be geology, not evolution. Secondly, I don't know of any evidence to suggest Mars-wide floods. Thirdly, recent findings do support some water on Mars.



Sure, if the earth's surface was smooth, it would be covered with water. However, the earth's surface is not smooth, has never been smooth, and there is zero evidence to suggest a world-wide flood.

In the battle of facts, you're arriving unarmed.
Did NASA find the evidence, or are they making that suggestion...?
Do you really believe matter thought itself into life...?
 

Neo

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2005
Messages
1,168
#68
MY QUESTION:
Why are so many kids committing suicide if there are purpose in their lifes?
So you're saying they're commiting suicide because there is no purpose in their lives? Where's God then?

YOUR QUOTE:
Please proof this statement. I always thought most Nazi's were Christians, for example
? (two can play this game....)
MY ANSWER:
Hitler a christian?...If you believe that you will be believe any fairytale…like evolution…
Now slowly read my sentence again. Most Nazi's were indeed Christians. Or is Germany a Muslim country? Hitler himself was strongly connected to the Pope.

“What the heck has sterile conditions have to do with disproving evolution?

MY ANSWER:
In plain english(I am not the scientist or bioligist), infection contradicts the origin of species because it is spread…
Please try another language. I still don't understand how the spread of infection contradicts evolution?

YOUR QUOTE:
It's called geology, you don't have to 'strain' at any idea.
MY QUESTION:
Do you strain at the idea of a global flood?
I'll happily accept a global flood if we have evidence of it. Just like I accept the proven localised floods we know about.

How many species developed due to adaptation?... not evolution
You tell me, I always though 'adaptation' was a component of natural selection.
 
Joined
Dec 13, 2006
Messages
5,776
#69
YOUR QUOTE:
So you're saying they're commiting suicide because there is no purpose in their lives? Where's God then?
MY ANSWER:
You are one that wish parents and schools not to teach children about the existence of the living god. You must answer this question not me…

YOUR QUOTE:
Most Nazi's were indeed Christians.
MY ANSWER:
I am not even make any further statement concerning this, but to ask you a question, if the jewish declared himself christian would that save him from the holocaust in Hitler’s Nazism regime… It was not about religion was it?

YOUR QUOTE:
Please try another language. I still don't understand how the spread of infection contradicts evolution?
MY ANSWER:
With your knowledge of evolution it should not be that difficult to grasp…

YOUR QUOTE:
I'll happily accept a global flood if we have evidence of it. Just like I accept the proven localised floods we know about.
MY ANSWER:
Evidence…like the evidence on Mars?

YOUR QUOTE:
You tell me, I always though 'adaptation' was a component of natural selection.
MY ANSWER:
Oh really?, you jumped over my question….:D
 

ToxicBunny

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 8, 2006
Messages
79,753
#70
I think I'm gonna jump into this debate..

Mr TB : You're now going to blame the loss of religious education at school as the main cause of the high suicide rate amongst teenagers now?

You were the one that brought "nazism" into a religious debate, and we are discussing the holocaust at all... it is entirely irrelevant to this discussion.

I have put the question of evolution and infection control to an atheistic Masters student of biology, and she looked just as confused as me, I fail to see how the spread of infection contradicts evolution..... diseases spread inside a host, they evolve to be able to leave that host and infect(live on) in other hosts. All seems to pretty much be a part of evolution, even in a small way to me.

There's evidence of a global flood on Mars? Where? Again you were the one that brought up the flood on Mars issue first. I will say there is compelling evidence that at one stage there was free flowing water on the surface of Mars, but a global flood... I dunno.

and saying adaptation is a component of natural selection and therefore evolution isn't jumping your question. Adaptation is but a small subset of the process of evolution.
 

LoneGunman

Expert Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2003
Messages
4,552
#71
just to throw a conceptual curveball - there are schools of thought in
evolution, which suggest that 'humankind' is potentially just an effective transport system
for bacteria. In other words, 'we' as humans evolved so that bacteria would have a means
of moving around. We're just a byproduct and transport method for evolving microbes that
needed to gather together and find new bugs.
Other theories suggest that we're an accidental but necessary byproduct of sperm
that wants to duplicate itself.. but that's just too crazy :p
 

Neo

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2005
Messages
1,168
#72
I think I'm gonna jump into this debate..

Mr TB : You're now going to blame the loss of religious education at school as the main cause of the high suicide rate amongst teenagers now?

You were the one that brought "nazism" into a religious debate, and we are discussing the holocaust at all... it is entirely irrelevant to this discussion.

I have put the question of evolution and infection control to an atheistic Masters student of biology, and she looked just as confused as me, I fail to see how the spread of infection contradicts evolution..... diseases spread inside a host, they evolve to be able to leave that host and infect(live on) in other hosts. All seems to pretty much be a part of evolution, even in a small way to me.

There's evidence of a global flood on Mars? Where? Again you were the one that brought up the flood on Mars issue first. I will say there is compelling evidence that at one stage there was free flowing water on the surface of Mars, but a global flood... I dunno.

and saying adaptation is a component of natural selection and therefore evolution isn't jumping your question. Adaptation is but a small subset of the process of evolution.
Thanks! Could not stomach typing it all up again. ;)
 

Neo

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2005
Messages
1,168
#73
just to throw a conceptual curveball - there are schools of thought in
evolution, which suggest that 'humankind' is potentially just an effective transport system
for bacteria. In other words, 'we' as humans evolved so that bacteria would have a means
of moving around. We're just a byproduct and transport method for evolving microbes that
needed to gather together and find new bugs.
Other theories suggest that we're an accidental but necessary byproduct of sperm
that wants to duplicate itself.. but that's just too crazy :p
A bit like the mice in the Hitchikers Guide? :)
 

Turtle

Expert Member
Joined
May 2, 2004
Messages
1,642
#74
I was thinking about something while driving home though and was wondering why is it always (or at least 99% of the time) us Christians called up to prove what we believe in. I have many times posed questions back and most times I dont get an answer and it quickly disappears into the spam of replies. It always seems like the Athiests and Agnostics are asking us Christians to defend ourselves.
I think it just feels that way to you because you are a Christian, so nobody asks you to defend the atheist position ('sampling bias'). I'm an atheist (well, technically an agnostic but for most debates with Christians the distinction is of little relevance), and believe me, if I had a Rand for every time *I* was asked by a Christian to defend my position, I'd be very wealthy.
 
Last edited:

ToxicBunny

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 8, 2006
Messages
79,753
#75
Neo : It are a pleasure...:)

Mr TB raised my hackles when its first post was kinda "attacking" me.... or at least trying to invalidate my feeling that we all just cease to exist when we die, by spouting nonsense.
 
Joined
Dec 13, 2006
Messages
5,776
#76
I think I'm gonna jump into this debate..


You were the one that brought "nazism" into a religious debate, and we are discussing the holocaust at all... it is entirely irrelevant to this discussion.
I am not lost for words and have the sneaky feeling that some of the atheists tried to pin the holocaust on the christians leading to a fair response:
YOUR QUOTE:
“You were the one that brought "nazism" into a religious debate, and we are discussing the holocaust at all... it is entirely irrelevant to this discussion”
MY REPLY
QUOTE:
“Unfortunately for mankind, Haeckel’s evolutionism laid the foundation for the intense German militarism that eventually contributed to World War I. And then,
‘Social Darwinism, racism, militarism, and imperialism finally reached their zenith in Nazi Germany under the unspeakable Adolph Hitler … Hitler himself became the supreme evolutionist, and Nazism the ultimate fruit of the evolutionary tree.’23
Thus, through his obsession with the anti-God precepts of evolution and his shameful fabrication of spurious data, Haeckel provided the malign influence and pernicious inspiration that were the indirect cause of two world wars and the atrocities of the holocaust.24 “
German darwinism diectly caused the HERERO genocide in africa if you are interested…
 

ToxicBunny

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 8, 2006
Messages
79,753
#77
No, I don't know of any atheists who have tried to pin the holocaust on christians, it is known to have been caused by the Nazi's... irrespective of what their religious leanings were.

Which scientific journal did you get that quote on evolutionism from?..... because I definately disagree that evolutionism had anything to do with the Holocaust, or genocide in Africa.
 

Kalvaer

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2004
Messages
3,859
#78
I think it just feels that way to you because you are a Christian, so nobody asks you to defend the atheist position ('sampling bias'). I'm an atheist (well, technically an agnostic but for most debates with Christians the distinction is of little relevance), and believe me, if I had a Rand for every time *I* was asked by a Christian to defend my position, I'd be very wealthy.
I guess it works both ways, both being asked to defend our positions. I really enjoy discussions regarding the topic when both parties can give valid arguments. On these forums lately it just seemed to be the Christians being asked to defend themselves all the times, but I was wrong.. it is in fact both parties as you stated.

Of course the worst is that everyone seems to be repeating themselves over and over on boths sides. No new Data is being input into the discussions but rather just somebody new coming in all the time and repeating something said previously (I'll admit, I've believe I might of done this as well). I've gotten to a point where I just try to ignore somebodies post when they just repeat something already stated (unless they bring something new to the disccusion and use it as a bases for their argument)

Cant we just all agree to disagree? .. Or at least discuss it rationally without the name calling and people bashing.
 
Last edited:

Claymore

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Messages
7,442
#80
‘Social Darwinism, racism, militarism, and imperialism finally reached their zenith in Nazi Germany under the unspeakable Adolph Hitler … Hitler himself became the supreme evolutionist, and Nazism the ultimate fruit of the evolutionary tree.’23

German darwinism diectly caused the HERERO genocide in africa if you are interested…
I think you're thinking of eugenics, not Darwinism. They're very different things.

And was this "Adolph Hitler" any relative of Adolf Hitler?
 
Top