Whats The Point Of All This?

[Mattnxtc 0]

Not a deceiver- deceived. There is a difference, mainly that you aren't quite smart enough. As far as the baptism issue- your soul, not mine. I can hand it to you on a silver platter, if you choose to still believe in the deception that is on you. Open your eyes- Matt has become near intolerable since this whole religous section opened, and his arrogant tone and smarmy ways are plain to see. Why do you think I barely bother with him anymore? It's an excercise in futility that I just don't have the time for.

not quite smart enough? i doubt that2nd you have 2 verses I have the rest of the bible...not a real fair comparison3rd. I am not arrogant. I dont claim to be better than anybody. I do claim that what i say has biblical backing and if that arrogance than i guess ur right. When i state something I can guarantee the biblical truth for it. can you? You dont bother b/c you use a bible with a language outdated, and refuse to look to the initial language. I wonder why you woudl refuse to look at the greek. are you afraid of what you might find?and yes i am baptized. why? B/c i wanted everybody to know of my committment to the Lord

[Loismustdie 0]

Lois, Matt and I have both been baptized, so we are cool in your book too.

Baptism is no good if you don't know why it's being done. You guys have no idea why- you aren't even in the vicinity.

not quite smart enough? i doubt that2nd you have 2 verses I have the rest of the bible...not a real fair comparison3rd. I am not arrogant. I dont claim to be better than anybody. I do claim that what i say has biblical backing and if that arrogance than i guess ur right. When i state something I can guarantee the biblical truth for it. can you? You dont bother b/c you use a bible with a language outdated, and refuse to look to the initial language. I wonder why you woudl refuse to look at the greek. are you afraid of what you might find?and yes i am baptized. why? B/c i wanted everybody to know of my committment to the Lord

Just one scripture that says that baptism is to show your commitment to the lord would be splendid. Just one. What? It doen't exist you say? Big suprise.

[MDXS 0]

hahahahahbest part about this is watchin people like you try and show how big and smart you are. I love hwo people who know little rephrase what little they know over and over hoping nobody notices.as for your arrogant comments. I promise you that nothing you said is remotely challenging as you wish it to be. I just really enjoy watchin some of yall contradict yourselves with your comments.Isnt it ironic that im the "dumb" one yet im the only one who continuously corrects and challenges yall when it comes to your contradictory statements. How come none of you educated people are correcting your collegues?

The only reason why I have to repeat myself so often is because what others and I have been saying so often either goes over your head or is ignored. I know I haven't said anything challenging. That's the whole point. I got involved in this thread when you said you haven't noticed anyone talking down to you or dumbing it down. I chimed in to say that I have in the many evolution threads. If you are perhaps referring to some bible contradictions and absurdities that I posed in yet another thread, of course those aren't challenging because bible literalists have a stock (often bizarre) rationalization for all of them. I was curious in what some of them could possibly be. Actually, maybe you're right. I do wish that some of those were more challenging to you. Unfortunately, your mind is made up no matter what, so you won't allow them to be.

[speedz99 145]

Like i have said for months, the challenge to find errors in my biblical answers is always open. If i post something that yall can disprove, by all means do it. But dont be so defensive when i expect the same from you.

Ok everyone, this is the reason why we'll never get anywhere. We will never find errors in his "biblical answers"...and he will never understand why we don't accept the bible as the final truth. End of story.But, Matt, the funny thing is that you asked for our reasoning about the evolution of ethics, as opposed to ethical behavior being taught by religion. I posted a link and a few thoughts. Instead of responding that that post, you responded to the posts that called you arrogant. Here...I'll post it again.

http://www.evolutionaryethics.com/There actually are many writings on this topic. For me, the most logical argument surrounds this statement...Altruism is an integral part of human survival. When people work together towards a better world it increases the survivability of the human species in ways that working towards ones own selfish interests cannot.I'm not sure if morals and ethics have been hard-coded into our genetic makeup. Obviously, I believe in evolution (and am impressed by anyone who does not), but this part of the process in my opinion is up for debate. Frankly, I don't understand why Christians are so against the idea that God created the Universe and started the action...but didn't "build" our bodies piece by piece.

So can you respond with your thoughts about that Web site, and my last comment?

[Mattnxtc 0]

Baptism is no good if you don't know why it's being done. You guys have no idea why- you aren't even in the vicinity. Just one scripture that says that baptism is to show your commitment to the lord would be splendid. Just one. What? It doen't exist you say? Big suprise.

Acts 10:44-the end of 10they were already saved, already had the Holy Spirit, already believers. So waht did baptism do? Sure as heck didnt help in salvation.Plus I can go to the early church history outside the bible to know what they did. You cant b/c your to proud to actually learn anything.

The only reason why I have to repeat myself so often is because what others and I have been saying so often either goes over your head or is ignored. I know I haven't said anything challenging. That's the whole point. I got involved in this thread when you said you haven't noticed anyone talking down to you or dumbing it down. I chimed in to say that I have in the many evolution threads. If you are perhaps referring to some bible contradictions and absurdities that I posed in yet another thread, of course those aren't challenging because bible literalists have a stock (often bizarre) rationalization for all of them. I was curious in what some of them could possibly be. Actually, maybe you're right. I do wish that some of those were more challenging to you. Unfortunately, your mind is made up no matter what, so you won't allow them to be.

First off, I started a thread to ask questions about evolution b/c I couldnt keep up with the varying answers yall gave. Yall still havent fully explained it and from what I can tell are left saying "we just dont know yet" (see my question about the laws that nature somehow follows). Second, your contradictions were cleared up rather easily with easy explanations. The problem isnt that bizarre explanations are needed, but simply just explaining the context and history. Most nonbelievers dont actually take the time to study the bible but merely latch on to one verse. I have found that around 99% of people who find contradictions make this mistakeThird, I dont ignore any question, never have. If I missed one then I am sorry, Speed reposted one that I am goign to comment on next. I dont avoid the questions but yall apparently have. (still waiting for that proof from monty). fourth my mind is in no way made up. I have said over and over that I will look at anything posted. (can yall say the same?). I believe I am right but I am also a realist. I realize there is a possibility that there is no God. I beleive that the evidence is overwhelmingly in my favor but there is always the possibility I am wrong. Unfortunately, yall dont appear to use the same approach. Yall come in here erady to "talk down" to christians b/c you dont believe in the "weak minded" stuff. So dont sit there and act like yall are some wise people

Ok everyone, this is the reason why we'll never get anywhere. We will never find errors in his "biblical answers"...and he will never understand why we don't accept the bible as the final truth. End of story.But, Matt, the funny thing is that you asked for our reasoning about the evolution of ethics, as opposed to ethical behavior being taught by religion. I posted a link and a few thoughts. Instead of responding that that post, you responded to the posts that called you arrogant. Here...I'll post it again.So can you respond with your thoughts about that Web site, and my last comment?

No the problem is that to find flaws in my biblical answers you would have to open a bible and i think many of yall are afraid of what you might find out. also I did not see the link. I dont know where it was posted or when. But I will take a look at it. I dont avoid discussions sorry

[speedz99 145]

No the problem is that to find flaws in my biblical answers you would have to open a bible and i think many of yall are afraid of what you might find out.

I'm not sure what you don't understand here. Many of us have opened up a bible...we just don't believe that it is the complete end-all in terms of how we should view the world. You can't respect that? Must everyone in the world agree with everything written in the bible?

also I did not see the link. I dont know where it was posted or when. But I will take a look at it. I dont avoid discussions sorry

No problem...it was on the second page of this thread. You must've missed it.

[iggymcfly 0]

We have a nonsensical storybook that a lot of people in this part of the world at this point in time profess to be absolute fact.

Are you God? Because it's the only way you could make such bold and silly statements.

Riiiiiight. Because only an invisible man in the sky could possibly be able to differentiate between fiction and non-fiction.

[copernicus 0]

http://www.evolutionaryethics.com/There actually are many writings on this topic. For me, the most logical argument surrounds this statement... I'm not sure if morals and ethics have been hard-coded into our genetic makeup. Obviously, I believe in evolution (and am impressed by anyone who does not), but this part of the process in my opinion is up for debate. Frankly, I don't understand why Christians are so against the idea that God created the Universe and started the action...but didn't "build" our bodies piece by piece.

Altruism is the result of empathy...being able to put yourself in the other mans shoes. Empathy is now being attributed to certain neurons who's function is mimicry. Eg a newborn, once his vision is cleared up, is immediately a mimic, sticking out his tongue when you stick out yours etc. Theyve mapped the mimicry neurons, and posit that the same neurons are responsible for empathy, socialization, ethics etc.Not a big jump from specialized neurons to evolution favoring those neurons.matt = troll put him on ignore, its the only way to kill trolls

[Mattnxtc 0]

Altruism is the result of empathy...being able to put yourself in the other mans shoes. Empathy is now being attributed to certain neurons who's function is mimicry. Eg a newborn, once his vision is cleared up, is immediately a mimic, sticking out his tongue when you stick out yours etc. Theyve mapped the mimicry neurons, and posit that the same neurons are responsible for empathy, socialization, ethics etc.Not a big jump from specialized neurons to evolution favoring those neurons.matt = troll put him on ignore, its the only way to kill trolls

Im the troll? you pop in add a random comment and then attack me...hmmm that seems to be teh definition of a troll....

[Mattnxtc 0]

speed...i read through most of the article you posted. I am goign to attempt to find a very good article that discusses more indepth the idea of the evolved morality and the problems that causes. I cant find it at the moment but ill keep lokoin for it.

[Canada 0]

Altruism is the result of empathy...being able to put yourself in the other mans shoes. Empathy is now being attributed to certain neurons who's function is mimicry. Eg a newborn, once his vision is cleared up, is immediately a mimic, sticking out his tongue when you stick out yours etc. Theyve mapped the mimicry neurons, and posit that the same neurons are responsible for empathy, socialization, ethics etc.Not a big jump from specialized neurons to evolution favoring those neurons.matt = troll put him on ignore, its the only way to kill trolls

The real question is why make right and wrong? What if you could do literally anything you wanted with no shame, guilt or consequence?Go crazy with it- anything that could possibly jump into your head is all good. You could walk into A KFC, pull down your pants and doodie in grandmas 3 piece special and nobody would even blink. Or, you could just grab her keys and take her car- it would not even be stealing, that would not exist, at least not as we know it, there would just be action and reaction, unfettered. See how smart God is? I am saying that in the midst of chaos, there is still order, by design- without an innate sense of morality we truly would be nothing more than talking meatsticks.

Encouraging socially acceptable behaviour and discouraging anti-social behaviour is not restricted to humans. There are countless numbers of social species that have 'chosen' the benefits of working together through natural selection.Any pack animal like lions and wolves or herd animals like cows and elephants work together as well as discouraging anti-social behaviour. Even insects like bees and ants work together. Now did God give them morals as well? Yet you also have other creatures that are fiercly independant and will kill each other on sight to defend their territory, only coming together to mate. Hands up who wants to be a male praying mantis?And yet again you have other species who mate and spend their lives together in pairs, working together as couples, but shunning a 'society'There is no order there. There is no design. All 3 options (Maximum grouping, minimal grouping (pairs) and non grouping) exist. If it was by design, the best sytem would function, not an inherited one. It's wonderfully random and chaotic, as is all life. Each species carrying on with behaviour that was benefitial to their ancestors survival.See how wonderful nature is and how clever Darwin was for pointing us in the right direction?

matt = troll put him on ignore, its the only way to kill trolls

Requoted for truth

[Mattnxtc 0]

As I promised here are several links to great discussions of moralshttp://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5237http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5458http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6221

[speedz99 145]

As I promised here are several links to great discussions of morals

Interesting stuff. Here is the main point of his argument against the evolution of morals, and why I don't think it makes any sense:

The answer is going to be that when we're selfish, it hurts the group. But you see, that answer isn't enough of an answer because that answer itself presumes another moral value that we ought to be concerned about the health of the group. So, I'm going to ask the question, "Why ought we be concerned about the health of the group?" The answer is going to be because if the groups don't survive, then the species doesn't survive. Then you can imagine the next question. "Why ought I care about the health of the species and whether the species survives or not?" You see, the problem with all of these responses that purport to be justifications or explanations for the moral rule, is that all of these things that are meant to explain the moral rule really depend themselves upon a moral rule before they can even be uttered. Therefore, it can't be the explanation of morality. When I ask the question "Why ought I be concerned with the species?", the next answer ends the series. The answer is, "I ought to be concerned with the species because if the species dies out, then I will not survive. If the species is in jeopardy, then my own personal self interests would be in jeopardy."

Evolution is about genetics. It's not about one person deciding that being selfless is "good for the group". It's about the fact that an animal that is selfish will not survive as long (and therefore have as many offspring) as an animal that is selfless. Evolution is not a personal choice, like this author seems to believe. It is fairly well written and logical, but in no way addresses the process of evolution.

[Mattnxtc 0]

Evolution is about genetics. It's not about one person deciding that being selfless is "good for the group". It's about the fact that an animal that is selfish will not survive as long (and therefore have as many offspring) as an animal that is selfless. Evolution is not a personal choice, like this author seems to believe. It is fairly well written and logical, but in no way addresses the process of evolution.

The articles were not about showing evolution to be right or wrong. I could post other thoughts on that. What the articles were talkin about is the fact that it isnt logical to assume that morals evolved. Since I understood that to be what your articles were about i provided the most relevant articles I could find that dealt with the subject of morals evolving. If this was not the point you were going for let me know. Again I was not posting articles dealing with evolution but with the theory that morals are a product of evolution.

[mtdesmoines 3]

So the final answer is, "We don't know."? Back to Jerry's main question (from what I understand). Let's assume God is all-knowing and all-powerful. He could have created the world however he saw fit, and he knows exactly what is going to happen. Why would he create a world where, according to the Bible, the vast majority of people are going to hell? And the OP specifically sounds like he is going to hell. Shouldn't he be pissed at God for damning him to an eternity of fire/brimstone/etc? Why should he worship this asshole?

You're forgetting that according to scripture, He already had a host of angels and other heavenly beings that were created before mankind. Mankind was not really "new", but rather, "unique." Something different that He created at a defined point within eternity for purposes of His own. Part of faith is accepting things you don't understand. Human beings make choices at all levels of faith, and at all entry points of belief. But at the end of the day, it all boils down to one thing: do you have Faith?

The articles were not about showing evolution to be right or wrong. I could post other thoughts on that. What the articles were talkin about is the fact that it isnt logical to assume that morals evolved. Since I understood that to be what your articles were about i provided the most relevant articles I could find that dealt with the subject of morals evolving. If this was not the point you were going for let me know. Again I was not posting articles dealing with evolution but with the theory that morals are a product of evolution.

Touting morality as a product of evolution is as ridiculous as touting the platypus as a product of evolution. But some find a way to do both. I guess it must be cool to have the Original Germ as your god. Natural law is ruthless, and there's no reason to believe that the 'morality anomaly' would have ever survived the evolutionary "vetting process." Anyone who witnessed the 20th century can clearly see that the lowest common denominator is something that even illuminated humanity trends toward.

[timwakefield 68]

as ridiculous as touting the platypus as a product of evolution.

Who's touting? Every species on earth is a product of evolution.YOU are an ape, you are not a divinely inspired creation. You are the product of happenstance. Deal with it.

[speedz99 145]

Touting morality as a product of evolution is as ridiculous as touting the platypus as a product of evolution. But some find a way to do both. I guess it must be cool to have the Original Germ as your god.

A quick Google search on "evolution of platypus" will give you literally hundreds of articles that explain why the Creationists that cling to the platypus as their sole example are extremely misinformed. The animal may be extremely strange, but studies over the past 20 years have shown that the odd features do assist the animal in terms of survival. You know...survival of the fittest...evolution...that thing. I'd put the specific links up for you...but you can just choose from the many that come up in the search.Once you read some articles and understand that you are incorrect about the platypus as a product of evolution being "ridiculous"...will you admit that you might be wrong about morality as well?

[Mattnxtc 0]

Who's touting? Every species on earth is a product of evolution.YOU are an ape, you are not a divinely inspired creation. You are the product of happenstance. Deal with it.

and this is based on what? a theory that is being questioned more than ever? Yes some evolution does occur but not at the macro level. I would say that within a 100 years the evolution theory will not exist, at least certainly not in the form its in now

[timwakefield 68]

and this is based on what? a theory that is being questioned more than ever? Yes some evolution does occur but not at the macro level. I would say that within a 100 years the evolution theory will not exist, at least certainly not in the form its in now

The theory of evolution is NOT questioned more than it was in the past. "Some evolution" does not occur, like you say. What you mean is that some adaptation occurs within species. But evolution of course DOES occur at the macro level.

[Mattnxtc 0]

The theory of evolution is NOT questioned more than it was in the past. "Some evolution" does not occur, like you say. What you mean is that some adaptation occurs within species. But evolution of course DOES occur at the macro level.

adaptation will never be the same as evolution. The evolution that you pray for just isnt going to happen. Sorry to disappoint yah

[timwakefield 68]

adaptation will never be the same as evolution. The evolution that you pray for just isnt going to happen. Sorry to disappoint yah

Yes my point was that you had confused adaptation with the theory of evolution. And it's not a question of if it's going to happen. Evolution is the way of the world, and has been for billions of years.

[Mattnxtc 0]

Yes my point was that you had confused adaptation with the theory of evolution. And it's not a question of if it's going to happen. Evolution is the way of the world, and has been for billions of years.

I have not confused anything and you hold on to a "theory" that is losing favor everyday. Like i said, within 100 years people will be talkin about the myth that was the evolution theory

[timwakefield 68]

I have not confused anything and you hold on to a "theory" that is losing favor everyday.

That's funny, because from my perspective YOU are the one holding on to a theory that is losing favor everyday.

[Mattnxtc 0]

That's funny, because from my perspective YOU are the one holding on to a theory that is losing favor everyday.

odd b/c christianity is rising everyday, and the theory of evolution is not, but that just must be a problem with the statistics. Im sure I am wrong. O wait Im not

[timwakefield 68]

odd b/c christianity is rising everyday, and the theory of evolution is not, but that just must be a problem with the statistics. Im sure I am wrong. O wait Im not

Christianity is one thing. A refusal to accept evolution is another.