Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9073 total)
67 online now:
AZPaul3, jar, PaulK, Tangle (4 members, 63 visitors)
Newest Member: MidwestPaul
Post Volume: Total: 893,327 Year: 4,439/6,534 Month: 653/900 Week: 177/182 Day: 10/47 Hour: 2/4

Announcements: Security Update Released


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Which religion's creation story should be taught?
RAZD
Member (Idle past 644 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 22 of 331 (121950)
07-04-2004 11:37 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by arachnophilia
06-16-2004 3:09 AM


almeyda writes:

I have yet to see real science support the belief of a religon besides the Bible.


more antitheism from almeyda?

the only trouble hindus have is that the scientific age of the universe is not old enough ...

see hindu fundamentalist creationism
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/mom/groves.html

buddhism aligns with quantum physics too, and there are several books on the topic. One geared to popular consumption is "The Dancing Wu Li Masters - An Overview of the New Physics," by Gary Zukav.

perhaps the lack of perception of alignment is not due to the understanding of other religions as much as it is due to the lack of understanding of science?


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}


This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by arachnophilia, posted 06-16-2004 3:09 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by arachnophilia, posted 07-05-2004 4:12 AM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 644 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 23 of 331 (121952)
07-04-2004 11:40 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by MexicanHotChocolate
06-18-2004 4:45 AM


Norse it for what it is worth
I like their version of the flood ... (you know that old canard creationists tout about all religions having a flood myth ...)

of blood from a slain giant.

heh.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}


This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by MexicanHotChocolate, posted 06-18-2004 4:45 AM MexicanHotChocolate has taken no action

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 644 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 24 of 331 (121955)
07-04-2004 11:46 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by almeyda
07-04-2004 1:20 AM


almeyda writes:

no science disagrees with the Bible, only evolution which is a theory


actually the science of evolution, geology, physics and astronomy have severe "disagreements" with the bible.

claiming that evolution "is just a theory" does not make it any less of a science than the others mentioned.

this is a back-door self-delusional type argument ... "no science disagrees (but any that do we don't recognize as science so we can tell ourselves this is true) ..."

enjoy.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}


This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by almeyda, posted 07-04-2004 1:20 AM almeyda has taken no action

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 644 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 27 of 331 (122190)
07-05-2004 4:56 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by arachnophilia
07-05-2004 4:12 AM


hindu branes
the hindu model of the universe would be a lot closer to the Ekpyrotic theory of repeating brane collisions:

"Brane Storm" Challenges Part of Big Pang Theory

"The [Ekpyrotic] scenario is that our current universe is [a] four-dimensional membrane embedded in a five-dimensional 'bulk' space, something like a sheet of paper in ordinary three-dimensional space," Turok told SPACE.com. "The idea then is that another membrane collided with ours, releasing energy and heat and leading to the expansion of our universe."

Ovrut said that in modeling a collision of branes, his group found that the result would be a universe that fits neatly with predictions of the Big Bang. It produces similar temperatures and causes the resulting universe to expand, for example, and creates matter with the same uniformity predicted by inflation.

The difference results in one distinctive observational prediction, though: Inflationary cosmology predicts a spectrum of gravitational waves that may be detectable in the cosmic microwave background. The ekpyrotic model predicts no gravitational wave effects should be observable in the cosmic microwave background.

The term ekpyrosis means "conflagration" in Greek, and refers to an ancient Stoic cosmological model. According to the model, the universe is created in a sudden burst of fire, not unlike the collision between three-dimensional worlds in our model. The current universe evolves from the initial fire. However, in the Stoic notion, the process may repeat itself in the future. This, too, is possible in our scenario in principle if there is more than one brane and, consequently, more than one collision.

Who knows, it may be closer to the truth than the standard model ... and multiple "creations" would be a severe problem for some, eh? We'll have to wait and see which "tests out" better.

enjoy.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}


This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by arachnophilia, posted 07-05-2004 4:12 AM arachnophilia has taken no action

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 644 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 292 of 331 (606899)
02-28-2011 9:07 PM
Reply to: Message 287 by JRTjr
02-28-2011 7:51 PM


Nature's God is the Deist God ...
Hi JRTjr.

This is why I bring up the Declaration of Independence. A document is not ‘Christian’ because it mentions ‘God’, ‘Christ’, ‘Heaven’, Etc. It is Christian if it is written by ‘Christians’, for ‘Christians’, to the edification of God All Mighty.

So, in this case then, as it is written by Deists, so the Constitution is Deist, yes?

quote:
... the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, ...

Clearly a Deist reference. NOT your Christian "God All Mighty" ... sorry.

Or your logic sucks (just one of many possibilities).

Message 290: Where, in the Constitution of the United States of Americas, is “establishment” Forbidden?

It's easy to actually read the documents involved you know.

http://www.archives.gov/...rs/bill_of_rights_transcript.html

quote:
Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


Bold added. Doesn't get clearer than that. All amendments become part of the constitution by definition.

Simply stated the congress cannot pass any laws that favor or disfavor any of all the world's religions.

Enjoy.

Edited by RAZD, : added amendment #1


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 287 by JRTjr, posted 02-28-2011 7:51 PM JRTjr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 307 by JRTjr, posted 03-01-2011 2:48 AM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 644 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 297 of 331 (606906)
02-28-2011 9:50 PM
Reply to: Message 295 by Theodoric
02-28-2011 9:11 PM


The Framers of the Constitution were not interested in religious affiliations
Hi Theodoric,

The evidence for Christianity being in the ‘Constitution of the United States of America’ is vested in the people who framed the Constitution; what they lived for, what they fought for; what they stood for, and who they were.

I am not sure what this mumbo-jumbo means, but I think you are trying to say that it is what you believe so it is true. Am I right?

Amusingly we have this little document of historical import:

http://www.usconstitution.net/constframe.html

quote:
The Framers of the Constitution

William Pierce, of Georgia, spoke very little at the Constitutional Convention, but his contributions to what we know of the other delegates to the Convention are invaluable. He wrote short character sketches of each of the delegates; he himself had to leave the Convention early for business reasons. He died two years later; his sketches were published in the Savannah Georgian in 1828. Pierce wrote his sketches in order of state; they are reproduced here in alphabetical order. The Library of Congress has the sketches in their original order as reported in Farrand's Records, Volume 3. Note that Pierce misspelled some names - these misspellings are retained here.


Curiously, though each member is described, only one has any mention of religious affiliation listed. From this we can easily conclude that the religious affiliations of the members was not a matter of importance among those writing the constitution.

Christians keep trying to re-write history, but unfortunately - for them - history is not so kind as to change because they want it to.

Enjoy.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 295 by Theodoric, posted 02-28-2011 9:11 PM Theodoric has taken no action

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 644 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 313 of 331 (606943)
03-01-2011 8:43 AM
Reply to: Message 307 by JRTjr
03-01-2011 2:48 AM


reality vs fantasy
Hi JRTjr

The words “respecting” and “prohibiting” do not mean “favor” or “disfavor”.

That's all you got? Equivocation on the meaning of words? Sadly, for you, this does not mean that you can establish a state religion in any way.

I repeat what I said in Message 292:

Message 290: Where, in the Constitution of the United States of Americas, is “establishment” Forbidden?

It's easy to actually read the documents involved you know.

http://www.archives.gov/...rs/bill_of_rights_transcript.html

quote:
Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


This is of course written in the english of the times.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/respecting

quote:
re·spect·ing
–preposition
regarding; concerning.

http://thesaurus.com/browse/respecting

quote:
Main Entry: respecting
Part of Speech: adjective
Definition: regarding
Synonyms: about, as to, concerning, in connection with, in respect to, referring to, relating to, with reference to, with regard to

Ergo the first phrase of the first Amendment to the constitution can be rendered as meaning:

Congress shall make no law regarding an establishment of religion, ...
or
Congress shall make no law concerning an establishment of religion, ...
or
Congress shall make no law in connection with an establishment of religion, ...
or
Congress shall make no law referring to an establishment of religion, ...
or
Congress shall make no law relating to an establishment of religion, ...
or
Congress shall make no law with reference to an establishment of religion, ...

That answers your question, whether you like the answer or not is irrelevant.

Just because you would like the American history to be richly guided by Christian beliefs, it just is not so. Even the Christianity that was practiced by some people (in addition to many other religions) is not like the modern Christianity and pretending otherwise will not make it so.

Americans at the time the Constitution was written were very well aware of the evils that come from the establishment of state religions, with the persecutions and murders of others, and most particularly when the oppressed moved to the colonies and then became the oppressors.

For these reasons they allowed for the free practice of ANY religion or related belief but specifically ruled out the possibility of the establishment of a state religion.

Enjoy.

Edited by RAZD, : clrty

Edited by RAZD, : mrclrty


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 307 by JRTjr, posted 03-01-2011 2:48 AM JRTjr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 320 by JRTjr, posted 03-13-2011 4:35 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 644 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 331 of 331 (608793)
03-13-2011 7:05 PM
Reply to: Message 320 by JRTjr
03-13-2011 4:35 PM


Re: reality vs fantasy
Hi JRTjr,

Great; so why, IF Congress ... may not make a law ... is the Supreme court restricting ....

The Supreme Court is the final say on interpreting the constitution, that is how the checks and balances work out. They have consistently ruled that public funded operations cannot be for the benefit of any one religion, whether Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, etc nor for the benefit of non-religion (atheism).

Suits get brought before the courts where states etc have tried to pass a law that contravenes the constitution, and the Supreme Court has consistently struck those inappropriate unconstitutional laws down.

... the established Christian heritage of the United States of America?

Sorry, there is no "established Christian heritage" in the USA and there never was. In the USA ALL beliefs are equally represented regardless of faith.

Let’s not forget the second Half “… Or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”

Which is why you can go to the church of your choice. Which is why you can pray to the god/s of your personal choice.

Those rights are curiously not infringed in any way by having laws that prevent people like you trying to establish a federal state religion that would infringe on those rights for people that do not believe as you do, whether they are Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, Deist, etc., agnostic, ignostic or atheist.

There are no restrictions placed on an “establishment of religion” in the U.S. Constitution.

As long as it does not involve public funding or government support (such as public schools etc), all beliefs -- whether they are Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, Deist, etc., agnostic, ignostic or atheist -- are equally able to set up churches and meeting places for the practice of those faiths ... as long as it does not involve public funding or government support (such as public schools etc).

This was the whole purpose of the First Amendment. To keep Government from interfering in religion;

AND vice versa.

There is no such restriction on religion interfering in government.

However, once you do that, you then cause government to interfere in religion. That is why there needs to be a "wall of separation" between church and state, as the founding fathers decreed, and why the US Supreme Court has consistently ruled for separation.

Enjoy.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 320 by JRTjr, posted 03-13-2011 4:35 PM JRTjr has taken no action

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022