EvC Forum: Ignorant, stupid or insane? (Or maybe wicked?)

Hi SignGuy and welcome to the forum.

Look, nomatter what evidence I bring to the table for creation there is an enormous amount of data interpreted to support your views. I still just see mounds and mounds of evidence, but no smoking gun.

Well there's part of your problem for starters; science is not some cheap murder-mystery. Science doesn't really deal in smoking guns, it deals in the weight of accumulated evidence, which provides gradually greater levels of confidence. Science is always tentative. It doesn't claim to make absolute statements of truth. There is always room for further refinement.

And to be frank, I see the appeal of choosing to believe in evolution or some other natural process of existence. It is very convient, even if it all seems to be "logical". Because you see if a person doesn't want to be affiliated with any religion, they have secular science with mounds of data (that gets interpreted, the data may be true but it still gets filtered by scientific interpretation.....) to back up a "logical" choice.

I have often heard this line of argument from Christians, especially creationists. I have to say, I do not recognise it at all. that is not how I approach the subject, nor is it a view I've ever heard atheists/agnostics espouse.

I don't disbelieve Christianity because it is "convenient". I disbelieve it because it lacks supporting evidence.

I don't trust in the scientific method because it provides me with some spurious rationale for ignoring Christianity. It trust in science because it works (and has saved my life once or twice).

I don't believe in evolution because it provides me with some bad excuse to do wicked things. I believe in it because of the weight of evidence in its favour.

Furthermore, he or she never feels responsible for there actions to a higher being. They can live life as they choose, with little to no consequences and feel comfortable because a small group of people interpret data, and write convincing papers to justify the way they chose to live.

Again, this is a familiar argument but again, it bears no relation to reality. I think you have misunderstood the motivations behind belief in concepts like evolution,with regard to both atheists and the millions of Christians who believe in evolution.

Do you really imagine that I (as an atheist) make reference to evolution in making moral decisions? I don't. It's not relevant. Do you really think that I make reference to evolution as some sort of excuse to ignore a god in whom I simply don't believe? I don't. Neither do I feel any need to make reference to the Christian god when making moral decisions; I don't believe he is real. He no more enters into my decision making process than any other fictional character.

Your religion is very important to you, I understand that. The thing is, it's just not important to me. I don't need to have an opinion one way or the other about God in order to make any decision about what I believe or how I should behave. Do you need to consider the reality of Shiva when making decisions? Of course not, I doubt you give him a moment's thought. Well that's how I feel about your god.

It's also worth mentioning that millions of Christians manage to believe in evolution without feeling any need to deny their belief in God. Many Christians see no conflict there. They don't believe in evolution out of some need to deny God, indeed, they don't deny God. They believe it for the same reasons I do; the weight of evidence is in evolution's favour.

On the contrary, the reason science doesn't reason with Christians is because it is something you feel & experience.

You're right, that does contrast with science.

These people have experienced God, creator of the uninverse, personally and are very grateful and humbled that God cared so much to save them through Jesus Christ. But you want to take that away with science? cuz its more logical?

First, I cannot take anyone's beliefs from them. They can only believe as they see fit. I may try to persuade them round to my point of view, but that seems perfectly reasonable to me.

The problem here is this; what do you do when a piece of religious dogma contradicts well evidenced science? What happens when religious dogma contradicts the facts? I would say that any idea which is so plainly contrary to reality should be considered false and that false ideas should be confronted and discouraged. You can call that an attempt to "take away" a person's beliefs if you like, but I can't take anyone's belief away. Everyone chooses what to believe for themselves. If an idea can be shown to be false, people will naturally abandon it. That seems like a good thing to me.

Competition is of ideas inevitable. You for instance say that you will stand up for the Lord. Okay, fair enough, but in doing so, you are trying to "take away" another person's belief in Islam, or another's belief in Hinduism, another's belief in Animism...

All philosophies must take their place in the marketplace of ideas. The supporters of those ideas will do their best to advocate for them, but this will always, by necessity, take place at the expense of other ideas. There's nothing wrong with that. I do it and you do it too. In fact, we all try to persuade others of the rightness of our ides. It's human nature.

But in general, on this website, I do not feel a common respect for other parties. I have seen people who are religious called **** for brains, stupid, ignorant and ironically wicked.

And I have seen Christians behave similarly. You are right that people do not always show each other the respect we should, both here and elsewhere. The internet has a tendency to breed rudeness.

You should be aware though that this is the "Free For All" forum. Moderation here is extremely minimal. If you want more civilised discussion, the other forums are more closely moderated.

But actually it is very arrogant to think, even if it you are conviced its true, that any one party should insist that other people beleive the facts you claim are facts indeed, or else you are dumb.

No-one is saying that. The problem is that, given that some creationists believe patent absurdities, we must find some way to explain the origin their peculiar ideas. Just yesterday, a creationist on this forum claimed that drinking blood of a different blood type would kill you. Now that's not right. It's horribly, painfully wrong. What is your explanation for such weird beliefs? Do you really think that a person who makes such a claim can be considered intelligent, sane and reasonable? Certainly he is deluded; what is your explanation for his delusion? What is your explanation for my failure to believe in Jesus Christ?

Mutate and Survive

"A curious aspect of the theory of evolution is that everybody thinks he understands it." - Jacques Monod

1 online now:	LamarkNewAge
Newest Member:	ChatGPT
Post Volume:	Total: 916,481 Year: 3,738/9,624 Month: 609/974 Week: 222/276 Day: 62/34 Hour: 1/4