This post is very long. Sorry for the tedium.
I'm surprised that no one's lost their head over this forum yet.
I'm surprised that you think no one has lost their head yet.
I meant for this to sound more like an actual decapitating, as opposed to just losing their cool. I guess it didn't really come out right, then, did it?
Obviously, Hill Billy and others on this forum do not agree with me.
If you don't mind, exactly what evidence did you use to come to this conclusion? Perhaps your emotions were more involved in the process than you are aware.
I guess I shouldn't have aimed that one at you: I wasn't reading carefully enough or distinguishing whose posts I was reading. I apologize
As to your afterlife experience, I can't really speak to that, nor have I. Have I? My guess is you will find out when your time comes.
I guess this was also unfair to point at you. But, it wasn't really my intention to point any of this directly at anybody: that's why I did a general reply. I'm still learning the systems of communication in these forums (fora?), and it will take awhile before I figure out how to make myself clear.
Yes, perhaps my feelings are a little involved in this. I'm an evolutionist in a very religious community, and I get right-wing fundamentalists cramming hell'n'dell messages and scriptures down my throat quite often. I even get it from my own mother.
See, I'm a religious person (I'm even in the priesthood), and I go to church, and I always get nervous about everything while I'm there, because nobody there believes what I believe, and nobody's willing to even entertain thoughts of believing in evolution, because none of them has taken the time to notice that all but a few very salient points in our religion are pretty much wide open for interpretation.
So, naturally, I've spent hundreds and hundreds of hours over the past few years studying everything I possibly can about evolution, Church doctrines and intelligent design, and I have come to the conclusion that there is nothing to the support the doctrinal arguments against evolution, and that there is no science to support the materialistic arguments against evolution. Furthermore, I have yet to encounter people who still argue with more than false science and personal emotions (which they insist are from the Holy Ghost, but can't give me a reason why it couldn't be something else).
This becomes a problem when their feelings are different from mine, because it isn't theoretically possible that the always-honest Holy Ghost is telling us two separate things. The only possible interpretation is that at least one of us is wrong (we can't actually infer that one of us has to be right, though). And, the one whose opinion relies
only on the feeling that might be wrong and upon doctrines that don't exist, and puts this fallible promenade above someone's equal and opposite feeling and legitimate hard work clearly, from my perspective, thinks he or she is better than me (and better than all those people who've spent their time working).
Of course, they understandably say, "No, not
I'm better than you, but
God's better than you." Therefore, the argument that evolutionists are condescending is usually spoken by the
emotionally humble (though, from my perspective, I don't see this as humble at all); while the argument that creationists are condescending is usually spoken by the
intellectually humble (though, from their perspective, this is not humble at all).
From your original post:
I have read a great many posts here and one thing has become very clear.
Evolutionists feel superior.
This isn't clear to me. I think this is more of a personal interpretation than an actual fact. I also believe that many of the quotes you provided from Rahvin and Nator would be much more understandable taken in context.
I've tried a few times to debate with creationists, and, very often, my well-thought-out and rational explanations are continually turned back with the same restatements of beliefs, feelings and interpretations from before, showing no sign that they've even listened to what I said. Even worse, they sometimes say none of my hard-earned knowledge means anything, because they have faith in something different (which they haven't worked for). It's very difficult to not blow up at that, even while you're praying to God that you can be patient and understanding and can try to see the best in your opponent.
It seems that evolutionists come here to debate motivated by a desire to crush their opponents and wallow in their superiority, while creationists come to debate out of a sincere concern for our souls. After all, is it not written that " Adam named his wife Eve, because she would become the mother of all living." Genesis 3:20.
I don't think this is an accurate assessment. It's probably not a good idea to judge evolutionists by what goes on in these forums. Most evolutionists are not in these forums, and most of them are very nice people who don't even engage creationists in debate at all. I think a lot of people come to these forums hoping to change people's minds with rational, well-thought-out arguments (I did, but it only took me one and a half debates with tesla to wake up from that fantasy). Others probably come to blow off steam, because of the aforementioned paucity of listening ears. Do not judge them by this: I'm sure Rahvin is a perfectly amiable and decent human being.
Furthermore (forgive me if this sounds rude or condescending), I don't believe it's possible for you to discern somebody's motivation from what they write. That kind of goes along with your signature line (it's a pretty good one, too, by the way). I think, what you're observing are the effects of an a intellectually-frustrating conversation on an intellectually-oriented person, not a direct derivative of what Nator or Rahvin actually believes.
Final thought: evolutionists and creationists come from two very different backgrounds in terms of intellectual and spiritual values, basic views on things, and what their parents and peers promote and identify with. Therefore, when we try to talk to them, we get frustrated because they won't think like us. When they try to talk to us, they get frustrated because we won't think like them. At the end of the debate, both groups think the other is stubborn, self-important and condescending, and both groups walk away thinking they won the debate.
Edited by Bluejay, : Added disclaimer at the top.
Signed,
Nobody Important (just Bluejay)
™ Version 4.2