Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,818 Year: 3,075/9,624 Month: 920/1,588 Week: 103/223 Day: 1/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Should we teach both evolution and religion in school?
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 1946 of 2073 (879831)
07-23-2020 12:49 PM
Reply to: Message 1945 by Kleinman
07-23-2020 12:31 PM


Re: TOE is religion in schools
Kleinman writes:
I've spent plenty of years in school and that's what was taught at that time.
Then you shouldn't need to ask us, "how did this happen?"

"I've been to Moose Jaw, now I can die." -- John Wing

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1945 by Kleinman, posted 07-23-2020 12:31 PM Kleinman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1947 by Kleinman, posted 07-23-2020 1:35 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 1955 of 2073 (879880)
07-24-2020 9:04 AM
Reply to: Message 1947 by Kleinman
07-23-2020 1:35 PM


Re: TOE is religion in schools
Kleinman writes:
Why not?
You claimed you learned it in school.

"I've been to Moose Jaw, now I can die." -- John Wing

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1947 by Kleinman, posted 07-23-2020 1:35 PM Kleinman has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 1959 of 2073 (879922)
07-25-2020 12:24 PM
Reply to: Message 1958 by Sarah Bellum
07-24-2020 1:33 PM


Re: Assumptions
Sarah Bellum writes:
They are "conclusions" in that what we have observed so far agrees with them.
That's what science is all about - drawing the best conclusions from what we know so far.

"I've been to Moose Jaw, now I can die." -- John Wing

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1958 by Sarah Bellum, posted 07-24-2020 1:33 PM Sarah Bellum has seen this message but not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 1973 of 2073 (889248)
11-12-2021 11:20 AM
Reply to: Message 1967 by Phat
11-11-2021 7:30 PM


Re: Response to Religious BS
Phat writes:
First of all its a lie that the implication that all ir most priests or pastors are harmful.
How many priests or pastors have to be thieves or child molesters before YOU begin to wonder about their "communion" with God?
Phat writes:
Second of all it is far from conclusive that God is a myth...
On the contrary, you have reached the conclusion yourself that Zeus is a myth. Many of us reject your God for the same reasons that you reject Zeus. That seems pretty darn close to conclusive.
Phat writes:
Third of all censoring freedom of ideas is manipulative and authoritarian!
Well, YOU guys are the ones who advocate censoring every other religion but your own. Do you advocate Muslim prayers in school? Do you invite Zoroastrians to preach in your church?

"I call that bold talk for a one-eyed fat man!"
-- Lucky Ned Pepper

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1967 by Phat, posted 11-11-2021 7:30 PM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1974 by jar, posted 11-12-2021 11:29 AM ringo has seen this message but not replied
 Message 1976 by Phat, posted 11-12-2021 10:09 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 1990 of 2073 (889277)
11-14-2021 1:16 PM
Reply to: Message 1976 by Phat
11-12-2021 10:09 PM


Re: Response to Religious BS
Phat writes:
We may have chosen incorrectly. Only after we all die may we ever know.
Exactly. Which is why it's foolish to put all your eggs in one basket.
Phat writes:
The difference between our certainty that our God is real vs all of the other choices is that we believe that truth is not relative nor are all God choices dynamically equivalent.
All of the other choices believe that too.
Phat writes:
... we believe that truth is not relative...
But of course it is relative. You own "truth" is as relative as any. Any "truth" that is not based on evidence must be relative.
Phat writes:
... nor are all God choices dynamically equivalent.
Your choice is less probable than many others.
Phat writes:
The idea that truth is relative we reject.
And you're wrong. See above. You might as well reject the idea that the world is round.
Phat writes:
The idea that Zeus or Odin is as likely as Jesus we also reject.
And you have no reason for that rejection.
Phat writes:
I need not explain why on earth God might choose me but suffice it to say its not my good works thatvcount.
It certainly does not suffice. You're blatantly rejecting what the Son of your own God said.

"I call that bold talk for a one-eyed fat man!"
-- Lucky Ned Pepper

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1976 by Phat, posted 11-12-2021 10:09 PM Phat has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 1991 of 2073 (889278)
11-14-2021 1:21 PM
Reply to: Message 1984 by Phat
11-13-2021 6:54 PM


Re: No Antidote
Phat writes:
well we do have an antichrist. In my mind anti means opposite rathar than "no". It can also mean contrary to the anointing or contrary to the anointed One.
That would be you.

"I call that bold talk for a one-eyed fat man!"
-- Lucky Ned Pepper

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1984 by Phat, posted 11-13-2021 6:54 PM Phat has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 1992 of 2073 (889279)
11-14-2021 1:28 PM
Reply to: Message 1977 by EWolf
11-12-2021 10:16 PM


EWolf writes:
Even the person that claims to have no religion lives by his religion of "no religion."
I believe in "no God". I practice "no religion". I go to "no church" every Sunday. I put "no money" in "no plate".
It's a pretty easy religion to live by. I could do it in my sleep.

"I call that bold talk for a one-eyed fat man!"
-- Lucky Ned Pepper

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1977 by EWolf, posted 11-12-2021 10:16 PM EWolf has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 2000 of 2073 (889318)
11-16-2021 10:59 AM
Reply to: Message 1994 by EWolf
11-15-2021 9:56 PM


EWolf writes:
As for the killing of the innocent, was God responsible for destroying the 62 plus million lives of unborn individuals before they could commit their first sin?
He was responsible for killing almost everybody on the earth with a flood. Do you think there were no unborn individuals (or even newborn individuals) who had not yet committed their first sin?

"I call that bold talk for a one-eyed fat man!"
-- Lucky Ned Pepper

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1994 by EWolf, posted 11-15-2021 9:56 PM EWolf has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 2007 of 2073 (889369)
11-20-2021 12:35 PM
Reply to: Message 2006 by EWolf
11-20-2021 12:24 PM


EWolf writes:
Is God murderous when He judges societies including its children....
Murder means "unlawful homicide" - so the questions is, "Whose law?" God may not be a murderer by His own law, but since when does that count for anything?
The killing of thousands of children by the Flood is certainly wrong under any human standard of morality.
EWolf writes:
... here are two helpful sights that should give insight.
We don't debate links here. Present the argument in your own words.

"I call that bold talk for a one-eyed fat man!"
-- Lucky Ned Pepper

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2006 by EWolf, posted 11-20-2021 12:24 PM EWolf has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024