Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Faith and other YEC: why even bother taking part in the discussion?
Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 61 of 141 (243708)
09-15-2005 6:13 AM
Reply to: Message 54 by CK
09-15-2005 5:13 AM


Its a fact anyway!
No need to preface it with anything, I am always right.
I will not discuss anything with anyone who doesn't first accept that everything I say is true.
Brian.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by CK, posted 09-15-2005 5:13 AM CK has not replied

cavediver
Member (Idle past 3643 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 62 of 141 (243709)
09-15-2005 6:31 AM
Reply to: Message 60 by Brian
09-15-2005 6:12 AM


Re: What debate?
I appreciate your ironic, and almost humorous reply... however, is it acceptable on EvC to post ad-hom attacks as long as they are followed by ironic, almost humorous replies? You made an ad-hom attack. Do you not have the guts to retract it?
You need to get out more then
Out from what, and into where?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by Brian, posted 09-15-2005 6:12 AM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by Brian, posted 09-15-2005 6:33 AM cavediver has replied
 Message 64 by CK, posted 09-15-2005 6:41 AM cavediver has replied

Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 63 of 141 (243710)
09-15-2005 6:33 AM
Reply to: Message 62 by cavediver
09-15-2005 6:31 AM


Re: What debate?
Where is the ad hom?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by cavediver, posted 09-15-2005 6:31 AM cavediver has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by cavediver, posted 09-15-2005 8:14 AM Brian has replied

CK
Member (Idle past 4127 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 64 of 141 (243712)
09-15-2005 6:41 AM
Reply to: Message 62 by cavediver
09-15-2005 6:31 AM


Re: What debate?
(Brian is incorrect that he is correct as I am correct.)
It is my belief* that many of the christians we have on here are suffering from Cognitive dissonance disorder and that is why they struggle with science. I will not explain further as quite clearly I am right and any questions would only proceed from your wrongheaded assumptions and misunderstandings.
I think it's entirely right and proper that if some members want to be able to start a debate with their starting position as the final answer that it should stand for all of us. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.
* I use my own meaning for words as is the new convention for the board - Belief= I am right.
This message has been edited by CK, 15-Sep-2005 06:42 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by cavediver, posted 09-15-2005 6:31 AM cavediver has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by Parasomnium, posted 09-15-2005 7:39 AM CK has not replied
 Message 66 by cavediver, posted 09-15-2005 8:09 AM CK has replied

Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2224
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 65 of 141 (243722)
09-15-2005 7:39 AM
Reply to: Message 64 by CK
09-15-2005 6:41 AM


Re: What debate?
CK writes:
* I use my own meaning for words as is the new convention for the board - Belief= I am right.
Sadly, you have the disadvantage of being a Brit. What you think is right, the rest of us call 'left', as in "Britons drive on the left side of the road, which they think is the right side." Mainland Europeans know left from right of course, and they also know that the left side of the road is most definitely the wrong side of the road to be on for longer spans of time.
Since Brian is a Brit too, you're both wrong - or, in your parlance, 'right'.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by CK, posted 09-15-2005 6:41 AM CK has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by iano, posted 09-15-2005 9:54 AM Parasomnium has replied

cavediver
Member (Idle past 3643 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 66 of 141 (243728)
09-15-2005 8:09 AM
Reply to: Message 64 by CK
09-15-2005 6:41 AM


Re: What debate?
Cognitive dissonance? Absolutely. Disorder? Perhaps a little strong in my mind, but probably not yours.
This is why the direct debate here is not working. Brian was quite right when he said
There really isnt any debatse going on with anyone who takes this stance, you would have more success arguing with a turnip
although I have had plenty of success in face-to-face discussions.
But I do not see this as leaving the doors open to the further comments made by Brian. Being in a state of cognitive dissonance does not imply that one is "sad" and "lonely". If by "sad" we actually mean "unhappy with the dissonance" then fine, but to suggest that a whole person's life is "sad" is absurd, especially as we have recent evidence that faith is one of the key elements that brings "happiness" (can't remember ths issue of New Scientist but here a ref to it BBC NEWS | Africa | Nigeria tops happiness survey)
I'm not sure what the issue is here. Are you annoyed with YECs for behaving this way, or with the Mods for not coming down harder? Either way, it is not a reason for your own standards to lapse, or even to allow parody a chance to be taken as the de rigueur debating style of this forum.
I think EvC is great place, which is why I hang out here. But comments on this thread have done it a disservice.
IMESHO of course

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by CK, posted 09-15-2005 6:41 AM CK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by CK, posted 09-15-2005 8:28 AM cavediver has not replied

cavediver
Member (Idle past 3643 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 67 of 141 (243729)
09-15-2005 8:14 AM
Reply to: Message 63 by Brian
09-15-2005 6:33 AM


Re: What debate?
You state that YECs posting on this forum are essentially "sad" and "lonely". In a discussion on "Faith and other YEC: why even bother taking part in the discussion", how is this not ad hom?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Brian, posted 09-15-2005 6:33 AM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by Brian, posted 09-15-2005 10:52 AM cavediver has not replied

Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 68 of 141 (243730)
09-15-2005 8:17 AM
Reply to: Message 60 by Brian
09-15-2005 6:12 AM


Re: What debate?
Brian writes:
I've shown my evidence, you just have to accept that my word is flawless, if I say they are sad, and lonely then that isn't up for debate.
Brian
You are supposed to say "Cheers, Brian." I get sad and lonely when you leave the word "cheers" out of your signature!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by Brian, posted 09-15-2005 6:12 AM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by Brian, posted 09-15-2005 10:57 AM Phat has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 69 of 141 (243733)
09-15-2005 8:24 AM
Reply to: Message 47 by Faith
09-15-2005 12:33 AM


Re: Interpretation
quote:
Unbelievers' interpretations are certainly fallible. Believers, however, have the Holy Spirit, but are still fallible, only that by believing and trusting in Christ they have the essence of the truth of the Bible that unbelievers don't have, and by the Holy Spirit they recognize the Holy Spirit in the Bible.
So, do you agree that believers, who are interpreting the Bible, can be wrong, because all of them are fallable?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by Faith, posted 09-15-2005 12:33 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by Faith, posted 09-15-2005 2:14 PM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 70 of 141 (243735)
09-15-2005 8:27 AM
Reply to: Message 50 by Phat
09-15-2005 3:18 AM


Re: Interpretation
I think that, being human and not perfect, omnicient, not omnipotent, we are all fallable all of the time.
Remember, "fallabe" means "capable of making a mistake."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by Phat, posted 09-15-2005 3:18 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by Phat, posted 09-15-2005 9:27 AM nator has replied

CK
Member (Idle past 4127 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 71 of 141 (243737)
09-15-2005 8:28 AM
Reply to: Message 66 by cavediver
09-15-2005 8:09 AM


Re: What debate?
quote:
Are you annoyed with YECs for behaving this way, or with the Mods for not coming down harder?
I'm not quite sure what is it - but I cannot help but notice that even the more calm and reasonable posters seem to be "acting up" more and more. Forums tend to go in cycles and we seem to be coming to one of those periods where we discuss endlessly why we are here and who should be here.
Faith is a problem or rather the reactions of other posters (me included) to her, any thread she appears on seems to turn into a black hole of nonsense and sniping. That's actually not her fault but the people replying to her (and I'm one of them). I do not really see how we overcome that at this stage.
The moderators have done her no favours by granting her special favourites (which she has NEVER asked for) - yes I know the rationale is so her (and those like her) viewpoint can be heard but all the other posters see is "special treatment", the rational responses seem to go out of the window at that point.
How many threads do we current have running that are about Faith as opposed to any issue of substance? (and yes I know I've just added to the list )
This message has been edited by CK, 15-Sep-2005 08:28 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by cavediver, posted 09-15-2005 8:09 AM cavediver has not replied

Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 72 of 141 (243752)
09-15-2005 9:27 AM
Reply to: Message 70 by nator
09-15-2005 8:27 AM


Re: Interpretation
What I mean't was that we are all infallible when God uses us to speak truth. Since you do not believe in God, I can see your point as the logical conclusion. I will never claim to be infallible, yet I DO know that on rare occasions, God has given me the best words for a given individual which they regarded as just what they needed. Who am I to say that my advice was infallible? Perhaps someone else could have given better advice. Perhaps your point is that we are never 100%...we are always striving to get closer to that ideal.
My point is that God is always 100% and on occasion uses humans to spread wisdom and truth.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by nator, posted 09-15-2005 8:27 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by nator, posted 09-15-2005 9:31 AM Phat has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 73 of 141 (243755)
09-15-2005 9:31 AM
Reply to: Message 72 by Phat
09-15-2005 9:27 AM


Re: Interpretation
quote:
My point is that God is always 100% and on occasion uses humans to spread wisdom and truth.
And that, IMO, is the most dangerous part of religion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by Phat, posted 09-15-2005 9:27 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by Phat, posted 09-15-2005 9:40 AM nator has replied
 Message 77 by Annafan, posted 09-15-2005 10:01 AM nator has not replied

Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 74 of 141 (243759)
09-15-2005 9:40 AM
Reply to: Message 73 by nator
09-15-2005 9:31 AM


Re: Interpretation
Is it dangerous because people use it to justify fanaticism? If so, I agree.
Is it dangerous because it is blind ignorance preventing human progress? If so, I disagree.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by nator, posted 09-15-2005 9:31 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by nator, posted 09-15-2005 9:49 AM Phat has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 75 of 141 (243764)
09-15-2005 9:49 AM
Reply to: Message 74 by Phat
09-15-2005 9:40 AM


Re: Interpretation
quote:
Is it dangerous because people use it to justify fanaticism? If so, I agree.
Yep.
...or to justify enforcement of strict gender roles/abusing women, killing other people, discriminating against other people, etc.
This message has been edited by schrafinator, 09-15-2005 09:51 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by Phat, posted 09-15-2005 9:40 AM Phat 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