RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (1000) < ... 287 288 289 290 291 [292] 293 294 295 296 297 ... >   
  Topic: Official Uncommonly Dense Discussion Thread< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Faid



Posts: 1143
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 06 2006,16:24   

Quote (Kristine @ Dec. 06 2006,15:47)
So, I think I’ll go float in another dimension with the UD steam angels, like TerryL:

My favorite Chesterton quote: “The falsity of religion disproves the existence of God no more than the existence of a forged five pound bank note disproves the existence of the Bank of Scotland.”

Ahem. The falsity of Piltdown Man disproves evolution no more than the (all together now!;) existence of a forged five pound bank note disproves the existence of the Bank of Scotland. Which I've never seen by the way. Turn about is fair play…

How many snarky evilutionist steam angels can dance in a bead of sweat on WAD's upper lip? Is he hoist by his own petard from heaven by a golden chain or an iron one? If a man makes a statement about intelligent design in the woods of Waco and a Minnesota woman isn’t around to hear it, is he still cute?

Speaking of Chesterton again, here's another quote (from the Father Brown novels again), that all those Crusaders against naturalism over at UD should read:

Quote
The taller priest nodded his bowed head and said:

"Ah, yes, these modern infidels appeal to their reason; but
who can look at those millions of worlds and not feel that there
may well be wonderful universes above us where reason is utterly
unreasonable?"

"No," said the other priest; "reason is always reasonable,
even in the last limbo, in the lost borderland of things.  I know
that people charge the Church with lowering reason, but it is just
the other way.  Alone on earth, the Church makes reason really
supreme.  Alone on earth, the Church affirms that God himself is
bound by reason."

The other priest raised his austere face to the spangled sky
and said:

"Yet who knows if in that infinite universe--?"

"Only infinite physically," said the little priest, turning
sharply in his seat, "not infinite in the sense of escaping from
the laws of truth."


:p

--------------
A look into DAVE HAWKINS' sense of honesty:

"The truth is that ALL mutations REDUCE information"

"...mutations can add information to a genome.  And remember, I have never said that this is not possible."

  
lkeithlu



Posts: 321
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 06 2006,17:30   

There is a new thread (that I cannot participate in) continuing the discussion about the Templeton Foundation:

http://www.uncommondescent.com/archives/1841

I still don't see how the Templeton Foundation was "responsible" for open solicitation for funds, or that they were "unfriendly" to ID; in fact, Dembski blogged about it in April and his response seemed to be "see? no Darwinian dogma here!"

http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/19

My point was the actual quote by the VP: Nothing was submitted. For this I got banned? I didn't even have a chance to research it further (although, a direct quote from the Senior VP seems enough to me; doesn't he speak for the Foundation?)

Oh, well; I discovered a couple of months ago that Dembski and I were born on the same day. I went on a bit of a bender after that little news...

  
Faid



Posts: 1143
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 06 2006,18:09   

Quote
My point was the actual quote by the VP: Nothing was submitted. For this I got banned?

yes.

like, duh.

<edit> It's worse. DT basically admitted that you were right, in the next thread, therefore implying that you got banned simply because you made his big fat 150 IQ ass look bad.
And he doesn't even feel the need to apologize.....


... :D  :D  :D  :D  :D HAHAHA oh man "apologize" I crack me up sometimes HAHAHAHAHA :D  :D  :D

--------------
A look into DAVE HAWKINS' sense of honesty:

"The truth is that ALL mutations REDUCE information"

"...mutations can add information to a genome.  And remember, I have never said that this is not possible."

  
Reciprocating Bill



Posts: 4265
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 06 2006,18:09   

lkeithlu:
Quote
My point was the actual quote by the VP: Nothing was submitted. For this I got banned? I didn't even have a chance to research it further (although, a direct quote from the Senior VP seems enough to me; doesn't he speak for the Foundation?)

You landed a hard right and DS has a big honking shiner.  You had it absolutely right, DS had it dead wrong, and was seen spinning ridiculous persecutory tales deep into the night in an attempt to rescue his position.  

Well done.  And worth the ban.

--------------
Myth: Something that never was true, and always will be.

"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you."
- David Foster Wallace

"Here’s a clue. Snarky banalities are not a substitute for saying something intelligent. Write that down."
- Barry Arrington

  
Reciprocating Bill



Posts: 4265
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 06 2006,18:21   

DS:
Quote
In that light I’d like commentary generally restricted to discussion of the awarded grants and whether or not any of them can be fairly characterized as ID research.

Right. Wouldn't want anyone asking, "Did you run into a door or something?"

--------------
Myth: Something that never was true, and always will be.

"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you."
- David Foster Wallace

"Here’s a clue. Snarky banalities are not a substitute for saying something intelligent. Write that down."
- Barry Arrington

  
lkeithlu



Posts: 321
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 06 2006,18:32   

Thanks, everyone-I can now (sniff) move on with my life.

*snort*

:p

  
keiths



Posts: 2041
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 07 2006,03:49   

Jonathan Wells is really scraping the bottom of the barrel, if this is any indication.  From the "Case for a Creator" DVD thread on UD:
Quote
I really enjoyed the DVD. I especially like the interview with Jonathan Wells, where he talked about taking a living cell in a sterile test tube, killing it, and then waiting for it to spontaneously re-assemble itself - simple but effective.

Comment by shaner74 — December 6, 2006 @ 9:40 pm

Yes.  It simply, but effectively, shows that Jonathan Wells is either an incredible doofus, or Rev. Moon's mendacious lackey, or both.

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number.  -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 07 2006,04:50   

Kristine,

Bad hair day? I can see your issues with the serpents of this plane(t). There's something you can help me with, as a gorgeous gorgon that is. You know the hair on your head is actually snakes, well is that a {cough} erm "universal" problem? If so does it make getting a brazillian something the late great Steve Irwin would have to do as opposed to one's beautician? What brand of under arm deodorant do you use? Does a roll-on get gobbled up? Inquiring minds STILL want to know.



Lou,

You got booted from BJU after one semester for thinking? Shortly after which you engaged in the game of horizontal table tennis?

Priceless.

Oh dear, I think I've just pissed a kidney laughing! That HAS to be the funniest thing I've read since what Kristine said a post or two ago. You guys cracketh me up.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
djmullen



Posts: 327
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 07 2006,05:36   

History according to Denyse:

In the Harvard’s origin of life project: Taking intelligent design seriously - sure, but what follows? thread, Denyse re-writes history:

 
Quote
Just as NASA spent billions trying to disconfirm the Big Bang, Harvard will spent at least millions trying to disconfirm ID, where origin of life is concerned.


Considering that NASA was formed after Sputnik was orbited in late 1957, when the steady state/big bang argument was already nearly settled and that the discovery of the Cosmic Background Radiation in 1964 utterly settled the controversy, I'd like to know when NASA had the time to try to disprove the Big Bang Theory.

I'd post a message on UD asking Denyse to substantiate this claim, but such wanton anti-ID tactics would never make it past the tard-filter.

  
Zachriel



Posts: 2709
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 07 2006,06:41   

Meanwhile, Joseph is still evading the simple question, does a paternal family tree constitute a nested hierarchy?

But, Joseph is not afraid, saying
Quote
And turning on comment moderation has nothing to do with being afraid.


--------------
Proudly banned three four five times by Uncommon Descent.
There is only one Tard. The Tard is One.

   
Zachriel



Posts: 2709
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 07 2006,07:14   

DaveScot    
Quote
For the life of me I can’t think of a reason why theistic evolutionists would be opposed in principle to ID. ID only disputes the chance nature of evolution.

That is incorrect. ID claims to have *scientific evidence* of "intelligent design" as an explanation of biological diversity.

DaveScot    
Quote
Now perhaps you can explain to me how any of this somehow opposes any of your personal religious convictions.

Because the claim is false. There is no such scientific evidence. Intelligent Design is a social and political movement that uses the language of science to sway the public. It has no scientific validity.

NATIONAL ACADEMY of SCIENCES: "The theory of evolution has become the central unifying concept of biology and is a critical component of many related scientific disciplines. In contrast, the claims of creation science lack empirical support and cannot be meaningfully tested."

--------------
Proudly banned three four five times by Uncommon Descent.
There is only one Tard. The Tard is One.

   
Lou FCD



Posts: 5402
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 07 2006,08:36   

Quote (Louis @ Dec. 07 2006,04:50)
Lou,

You got booted from BJU after one semester for thinking? Shortly after which you engaged in the game of horizontal table tennis?

Priceless.

Oh dear, I think I've just pissed a kidney laughing! That HAS to be the funniest thing I've read since what Kristine said a post or two ago. You guys cracketh me up.

Louis

True story.  Sucky part of that for them is that I was one of the faithful.  I really just wanted to reconcile what the Bible was teaching, I wasn't in any way questioning my faith... until I got the run-around.

I was a damned good preacher-boy, too.

It all started with a conversation about the classic "where do babies go when they die?"

I couldn't reconcile "God is Love" with "No man cometh unto the Father but by me".  The short answer is they go to ####.  There is no "Age of Accountability" in the Bible.  That's a feel-good church doctrine to appease the masses.

It was only the first of a list of questions.

It was also the beginning of several years of internal turmoil (not to mention the beginning of the end of my BJU career), for which I am now grateful, but wish never to repeat.

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
Reciprocating Bill



Posts: 4265
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 07 2006,10:00   

Quote
21. Joseph // Dec 7th 2006 at 7:38 am

pegase:
as of the existence of the Intelligent Designer and his nature

The existence of the designer and his nature are irrelevant to ID.

Joseph not only drank the Cool Aid, he is swimming in it.

I understand the strategic decision to dodge questions vis specific characteristics of the telic entity - ANY response to such questions activates the absurdities entailed in claiming to build a science around supernatural intervention.  

But asserting that even the existence of an intelligent designer is itself irrelevent to intelligent design theory takes this simulated agnosticism (which has got to be both as exciting and as fertile as simulated intercourse) to new realms of emptiness and dishonesty: "We've detected design. But we aren't claiming there was a designer."  

(There's a warm area of the pool I'd avoid.)

--------------
Myth: Something that never was true, and always will be.

"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you."
- David Foster Wallace

"Here’s a clue. Snarky banalities are not a substitute for saying something intelligent. Write that down."
- Barry Arrington

  
bfish



Posts: 267
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 07 2006,10:24   

Quote (Zachriel @ Dec. 07 2006,06:41)
Meanwhile, Joseph is still evading the simple question, does a paternal family tree constitute a nested hierarchy?


Zachriel,
  Have you ever figured out what Joseph's confusion is regarding nested heirachies? I followed your link to his web site once (once was enough), and saw him claim that not only is a nested heirarchy NOT a prediction of ToE and Common Descent, but that it is proof AGAINST ToE and Common Descent. [Head spins around three times.]   WTF?
  I tried to parse his reasoning, and all I can possibly come up with is that he is getting confused by the existence of homoplasy. Have you been able to twist your mind enough to figure out what he's thinking? I admire your efforts to set him straight.

  
Zachriel



Posts: 2709
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 07 2006,11:18   

Quote (bfish @ Dec. 07 2006,10:24)
         
Quote (Zachriel @ Dec. 07 2006,06:41)
Meanwhile, Joseph is still evading the simple question, does a paternal family tree constitute a nested hierarchy?

Zachriel,
  Have you ever figured out what Joseph's confusion is regarding nested heirachies?

I believe he is confusing the pattern with the argument concerning common descent. Unfortunately, he is not able to separate the concepts. My approach was meant to be as follows:

Nested Hierarchy
Define the nested hierarchy in terms of sets.
Use a few simple examples, such as paternity.
Show how objects can be arbitrarily arranged into patterns or groups.

Taxonomy
Show how we use independently derived traits to group like objects, such as an apple, an orange and a rock.

Phylogeny
Show how organisms can be arranged into a nested hierarchy by taxonomy.
Show how a nested hierarchy is the natural outcome of descent with modification of diverging and uncrossed lines.

Paternity is a typical example of a nested hierarchy, and is not necessarily a biological concept, but often times legal (adoption), political (noble succession) or economic (estates). Yet sons can be grouped in sets by father, and each father is someone's son. Each son has one-and-only-one paternity. To avoid ambiguity, I even provided the specific example of Sharif Hussein bin Ali's royal succession.

Of course, we haven't been able to get past the first part, even after several threads. He just can't give a yes or no answer to the question, "Does a paternal family tree constitute a nested hierarchy?"

--
Addendum 12/8/2006: I've attempted since April to have Joseph engage the issue of the nested hierarchy. At this point, it is clear that he refuses to answer a simple question, even after I have asked repeatedly and pointedly. It's very sad, in a way. He really thinks he has made a valid point when he hasn't even grappled with the simplest aspects of the problem.

--------------
Proudly banned three four five times by Uncommon Descent.
There is only one Tard. The Tard is One.

   
k.e



Posts: 1948
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 07 2006,11:33   

LouFCD ( he's not the messiah, he's just a very naughty boy)
Quote
It was also the beginning of several years of internal turmoil (not to mention the beginning of the end of my BJU career), for which I am now grateful, but wish never to repeat.


Indeed, that is the very real turmoil that AFD etc could not possibly stomach, they are that far removed from reality by their Mythology, that they suffer from institutional schizophrenia.

I think Mythology has something to say about that.... somewhere.

Oh yeah ....thats right......it REQUIRES being reborn, who wants to re-live the birth trauma? It could be like a very bad acid trip for the hard core fundamentalist.

Mythology in fact, it is full of such journeys, 40 days in the desert, Job wrestling his demons in his sleep the whole tale of Noah is a tale of rebirth, not to mention most of the tales of snakes in Myth, complete with snakes eating their own tails.

The snake shedding its skin is the archetypal rebirth symbol in Myth since everyone in ancient times would immediately recognize the symbol or sign. Nowadays who has seen a dried out snake skin while out and about?

A very real human experience that at one level works IF the story is taken as true OR is experienced by the journey taker.

Science deflates Myth as true history and for those that are unable to see beyond the words, removes meaning which causes all sorts of teeth gnashing...such as UD Joe's' and AFD's denial.

The real problem is that the clash of science vs Myth produces people trapped in a reality no-mans land.

When objectivist rationality treats Myth as true stories a self created hyper technical h3ll is created where absolutes govern and nuance and subjective reasoning are meaningless.

If Myth were not mythandled by major religions and charlatans like Dembski and his moronic minions but accepted as they were always meant to be accepted; as windows into a magical reality full of wonder and wisdom, though not absolute truths, then there would be no need to have the stamp of approval from science.

--------------
The conservative has but little to fear from the man whose reason is the servant of his passions, but let him beware of him in whom reason has become the greatest and most terrible of the passions.These are the wreckers of outworn empires and civilisations, doubters, disintegrators, deicides.Haldane

   
Zachriel



Posts: 2709
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 07 2006,11:58   

Ellis
Quote
Your “prediction” can never really be fulfilled. Even if the scientists who perform the experiments come up with multiple plausible ways in which life could have formed, you can always claim that it all points to ID because they had to intelligently design the experimental conditions and we can never really know if those conditions existed billions of years ago. Catch-22, anyone?

DaveScot
Quote
Ellis

So if we say something can falsify ID and it happens you just know we’ll somehow renege on what we said.

You’re out of here. Buh bye.


--------------
Proudly banned three four five times by Uncommon Descent.
There is only one Tard. The Tard is One.

   
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 07 2006,12:13   

Quote (Zachriel @ Dec. 07 2006,11:58)
Ellis    
Quote
Your “prediction” can never really be fulfilled. Even if the scientists who perform the experiments come up with multiple plausible ways in which life could have formed, you can always claim that it all points to ID because they had to intelligently design the experimental conditions and we can never really know if those conditions existed billions of years ago. Catch-22, anyone?

DaveScot    
Quote
Ellis

So if we say something can falsify ID and it happens you just know we’ll somehow renege on what we said.

You’re out of here. Buh bye.

The funny thing about that is that Ellis was just paraphrasing the argument offered in this UD entry that was written by none other than...........DaveScot!

http://www.uncommondescent.com/archives/1610

How dare anyone use Dave's own words against him!!!!

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
stevestory



Posts: 10244
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 07 2006,12:20   

http://scienceblogs.com/evolutionblog/2006/12/iscid_rip.php

   
Kristine



Posts: 3061
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 07 2006,12:43   

[Warning: length]

Unlike Lou I never was a preacher but I was the best student in my Sunday school/Bible classes, even when I wasn’t buying it anymore. (And why were the bored, disinterested students the ones who have hung on to the faith?)

I was talking to a co-worker who has a similar background about how it drives us nuts when believers violate the spirit of their religion in following the letter of scripture (i.e., charlatans). I think that atheists who had a religious upbringing never quite discard that concern for the spirit of what we’ve been taught; I wish the UD folks would consider motivation for our “materialism.” If the church really wants only mediocre minds and lukewarm conformists, that is definitely the message I received. And if it wants people to lie, then who occupies the moral high ground?

Re: Myths. Dembski said in his sermon that moral pain was more important than the physical pain. Whatever you think of that opinion, I haven’t been able to forget it and it did raise a few questions in my mind. Therefore, for the good of his soul, I would ask Dembski, if I could, what sacrifice he would be willing to make in the name of something else he spoke of, love of one’s neighbor. Specifically, I would like him to state yea or nay whether he subscribes to some of the loopier beliefs espoused by his colleagues (denial of the HIV-AIDS link, global warming denial, etc.) and if he would be willing to sacrifice these, at least, in the face of their possible detrimental effect upon other peoples’ lives—and speak out against them.

Also he should speak out against those arguments for intelligent design that he knows are mere creationist restatements. Why would he not do this, if there is scientific evidence instead? ;)

I understand how difficult and frightening it is to sacrifice one’s deeply-held notions and endure the subsequent moral pain of uncertainty, but it seems to me that Dembski is talking about a choice that a lot of us have already made—but he doesn’t see that, since our choices took us away from Jesus. Well, I’m not asking Dembski to give up Jesus; I’m willing to step away from that position, though I retain all the objections to religion that I’ve stated previously.

I’d be willing to draw the line behind the ones that I’ve previously drawn; would he be willing to draw the line somewhere? Pseudoscience has real consequences in people’s lives. So does valid science. Isn’t the pursuit of science an expression of love of one’s neighbor?

--------------
Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

"Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5402
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 07 2006,12:48   

Quote (k.e @ Dec. 07 2006,11:33)
LouFCD ( he's not the messiah, he's just a very naughty boy)

and two VERY naughty girls...

;)

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
Faid



Posts: 1143
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 07 2006,12:49   

Quote (carlsonjok @ Dec. 07 2006,12:13)
Quote (Zachriel @ Dec. 07 2006,11:58)
Ellis      
Quote
Your “prediction” can never really be fulfilled. Even if the scientists who perform the experiments come up with multiple plausible ways in which life could have formed, you can always claim that it all points to ID because they had to intelligently design the experimental conditions and we can never really know if those conditions existed billions of years ago. Catch-22, anyone?

DaveScot      
Quote
Ellis

So if we say something can falsify ID and it happens you just know we’ll somehow renege on what we said.

You’re out of here. Buh bye.

The funny thing about that is that Ellis was just paraphrasing the argument offered in this UD entry that was written by none other than...........DaveScot!

http://www.uncommondescent.com/archives/1610

How dare anyone use Dave's own words against him!!!!

:D


Oh man, I wish I had a grumpy old uncle like Davescot. It would make family reunions so much fun.

--------------
A look into DAVE HAWKINS' sense of honesty:

"The truth is that ALL mutations REDUCE information"

"...mutations can add information to a genome.  And remember, I have never said that this is not possible."

  
keiths



Posts: 2041
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 07 2006,13:18   

Quote (carlsonjok @ Dec. 07 2006,12:13)
How dare anyone use Dave's own words against him!!!!

A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.  A foolish inconsistency is the province of big Texas-sized minds like Davey's.

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number.  -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 07 2006,13:29   

Quote (keiths @ Dec. 07 2006,13:18)
Quote (carlsonjok @ Dec. 07 2006,12:13)
How dare anyone use Dave's own words against him!!!!

A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.  A foolish inconsistency is the province of big Texas-sized minds like Davey's.

Off-topic, but I finally got an iPod and downloaded all my music onto it. I was rediscovering stuff that I hadn't listened to in years when I came across the Austin Lounge Lizards, the bluegrass answer to Weird Al or the Barenaked Ladies.  One of their hallmark songs is "Stupid Texas Song", which pokes fun of Texan's apparent obsession with size.  

http://www.austinlizards.com/stupid_texas_song.html

No specific mention of IQs, but there might be a few that fit.  Javison would certainly think so.

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
ScaryFacts



Posts: 337
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 07 2006,13:55   

Quote (Lou FCD @ Dec. 07 2006,08:36)
True story.  Sucky part of that for them is that I was one of the faithful.  I really just wanted to reconcile what the Bible was teaching, I wasn't in any way questioning my faith... until I got the run-around.

...

It was also the beginning of several years of internal turmoil (not to mention the beginning of the end of my BJU career), for which I am now grateful, but wish never to repeat.

It’s been five years since I left the church (and my 18 year long job as a pastor) and I am still trying to reconcile many things in my mind.  You mention you were “one of the faithful.”  I prefer the word “sincere.”  I see very few in the church who are there for sincere and intellectually honest reasons.  That’s one of the reasons I left.

I can readily accept the Bible as errant, but I do believe it is a reliable account of man’s understanding of his relationship with the Judeo/Christian deity.   Perspective is everything.

The reasons I choose to remain a Christian despite what I have seen and experienced in the church are two-fold:

First, the principles work in my own life.  Keeping a Sabbath has allowed my wife and I to raise two incredible young men—both of whom are sincere, thinking, compassionate and strong.  Loving others has helped me to build relationships that are strong and mutually beneficial.

Second, (at the risk of sounding like Zero) I have had numerous experiences which lead me to believe there is a “spiritual existence.”  I don’t have a complete grasp of that spiritual “place,” but I am confident it exists.  In my own life I have been able to grasp that place through worshipping the Christian God.  (That is not to say others may have been able to grasp that place through other means.)

(If anyone is interested I would be happy to post some of those experiences at my blog and we can discuss them.  There are hundreds of them documented in my journals over the last 25 years.  Some could obviously be subjective, but many are difficult to explain.  I am not an evangelist, but I would like my thinking on this matter critiqued and you guys seem more than able to discuss logical fallicy.)

   
Kristine



Posts: 3061
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 07 2006,14:34   

Quote
Bad hair day?


No, not at all. Why?  :p

I think maybe some church lady might be giving my comment the hate stare.

"Let her comment, Denyse, let her comment, we'll just ignore her. Shhhh. Then when she leaves the table to go to the ladies' room, everyone leave! And stick her with the bill (not that Bill). Wah-ha-ha-ha!"

I'll just put it on my NASA charge. Billions of $$ worth of baby back ribs. ~smack!~

--------------
Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

"Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

  
keiths



Posts: 2041
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 07 2006,15:41   

Quote (Louis @ Dec. 07 2006,04:50)
Lou,

You got booted from BJU after one semester for thinking?

Ah, the fundies stole his adolescence, so now he's reliving it through JanieBelle and Kate.

Luckily I escaped fundyland at 14, still early enough to sow my oats.

I visited BJU in the 80's.  Highlights of the trip:  
1) The "dating lounge", where prim couples held hands on sofas under the watchful eyes of chaperones, and
2) The chain-link fence surrounding the campus, topped with strands of barbed wire.  You'd have expected the barbed wire to be canted outward to repel intruders, but no, it was canted inward, as if BJU were a prison (which I suppose it was, for people like Lou).

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number.  -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
keiths



Posts: 2041
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 07 2006,16:02   

Quote (ScaryFacts @ Dec. 07 2006,13:55)
It’s been five years since I left the church (and my 18 year long job as a pastor) and I am still trying to reconcile many things in my mind.

Wow.  It must have been wrenching to leave after 18 years as pastor.   

 
Quote
(If anyone is interested I would be happy to post some of those experiences at my blog and we can discuss them.

I'd certainly be interested in reading and commenting on them.

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number.  -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
Kristine



Posts: 3061
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 07 2006,16:34   

Quote
I couldn't reconcile "God is Love" with "No man cometh unto the Father but by me".  The short answer is they go to ####.  There is no "Age of Accountability" in the Bible.  That's a feel-good church doctrine to appease the masses.


Wow. At least when I finally had the courage to ask about how God could be so mean, killing the Egyptian first-born for what their parents had done, I was told (because my church wasn’t fundy, although some people were) that God sends all children to heaven no matter what they believed, because they were children. But I had already bought out of Christianity at around age nine or ten, anyway. That’s pretty young. Considering that I continued on alone in this for years, I raise the “design” question again.

Quote
I'd certainly be interested in reading and commenting on them.


So would I.

--------------
Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

"Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

  
ScaryFacts



Posts: 337
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 07 2006,16:37   

Quote (keiths @ Dec. 07 2006,16:02)
Wow.  It must have been wrenching to leave after 18 years as pastor.
  
Thanks Keiths for your kind words.  Yes, it was difficult, but (mostly non-Christian) friends helped ease the transition.  Now I see it as an amazingly positive step for my family and, surprisingly, my faith.
Quote (keiths @ Dec. 07 2006,16:02)
I'd certainly be interested in reading and commenting on them.

I'll post some when I get a chance and I will let you know.

   
  29999 replies since Jan. 16 2006,11:43 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (1000) < ... 287 288 289 290 291 [292] 293 294 295 296 297 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]