Easy options.

[GeminiBrian]

If Christian belief leads to the denial of established scientific knowledge and facts, such belief encourages intellectual laziness.

Rarely, if ever, do we see a theist member debate against evolutionary theory, for instance, based on a sound understanding of that theory - rather we see a chaotic rag-bag of ill-thought through notions that, needless to say, never stand up to close scrutiny.

This glibly ignores the sheer volume of work and dedication that has gone into investigating these problems for at least a couple of hundred years. Work that theists have no intention whatever of doing themselves, as far as I can see.

In order to maintain respect, I believe such members should be expected to be at least partially acquainted with the rudiments of what they are attempting to demolish, but this is seldom the case, unfortunately. Calling a genius like Darwin 'mad', or ridiculing the erudite professor Dawkins with crude abuse has become a bit of an unpleasant sport for some, and reflects very badly on their mindset.

For these reasons and others, I accuse all theists of mental laziness, because unless they can demonstrate serious objections, based on study, rather than religious prejudice, they are making fools of themselves.

This applies also to knowledge of scripture, since it is alarmingly apparent just how sketchy that actually is in many cases, with us atheists often having to aquatint the theists with the very content of their own bibles.

Furthermore, I suggest this common theistic disinclination to do the neccessary ground-work is a direct concomitant of the most central teaching of Christianity - personal redemption and forgiveness of sins for the asking... Compared to, say, less indulgent philosophies such as Buddhism, which require the individual to put some effort into attaining any worthwhile spiritual results.

By comparison, Christianity offers easy salvation on a holy platter, as a slick package, and requires the believer to do no more in return than swallow their pride, intellect and rationality -- That, and a blind faith in their capricious supernatural redeemer... spiritual indolence, if you like... Worst of all, belief in God tends to neutralise the outrage we should feel at some of the worst injustices in the world, since God will see to it that it all turns out right in the end - he won't: because he doesn't exist.

From my own atheist standpoint, then, believers open themselves up to charges of intellectual laziness on several fronts... of a mushy spiritual cosiness at the expense of a more rigourous approach.

And surely, anything worth achieving cannot be gained without some pretty determined individual effort.

[Gods_Mercenary]

I have no problem with the educated, knowledgeable, theists with well thought out beliefs (think jesuits), its the ones who refuse to even understand their own beliefs, much less their opponents' that annoy me.

[brisbane buddy]

Quote by: GeminiBrian If Christian belief leads to the denial of established scientific knowledge and facts, such belief encourages intellectual laziness. Rarely, if ever, do we see a theist member debate against evolutionary theory, for instance, based on a sound understanding of that theory - rather we see a chaotic rag-bag of ill-thought through notions that, needless to say, never stand up to close scrutiny. This glibly ignores the sheer volume of work and dedication that has gone into investigating these problems for at least a couple of hundred years. Work that theists have no intention whatever of doing themselves, as far as I can see. In order to maintain respect, I believe such members should be expected to be at least partially acquainted with the rudiments of what they are attempting to demolish, but this is seldom the case, unfortunately. Calling a genius like Darwin 'mad', or ridiculing the erudite professor Dawkins with crude abuse has become a bit of an unpleasant sport for some, and reflects very badly on their mindset. For these reasons and others, I accuse all theists of mental laziness, because unless they can demonstrate serious objections, based on study, rather than religious prejudice, they are making fools of themselves. This applies also to knowledge of scripture, since it is alarmingly apparent just how sketchy that actually is in many cases, with us atheists often having to aquatint the theists with the very content of their own bibles. Furthermore, I suggest this common theistic disinclination to do the neccessary ground-work is a direct concomitant of the most central teaching of Christianity - personal redemption and forgiveness of sins for the asking... Compared to, say, less indulgent philosophies such as Buddhism, which require the individual to put some effort into attaining any worthwhile spiritual results. By comparison, Christianity offers easy salvation on a holy platter, as a slick package, and requires the believer to do no more in return than swallow their pride, intellect and rationality -- That, and a blind faith in their capricious supernatural redeemer... spiritual indolence, if you like... Worst of all, belief in God tends to neutralise the outrage we should feel at some of the worst injustices in the world, since God will see to it that it all turns out right in the end - he won't: because he doesn't exist. From my own atheist standpoint, then, believers open themselves up to charges of intellectual laziness on several fronts... of a mushy spiritual cosiness at the expense of a more rigourous approach. And surely, anything worth achieving cannot be gained without some pretty determined individual effort.

Tell me GeminiBrian, what made the dinosaur extinct?

Cheers.

[shawmutt]

Quote by: brisbane buddy Tell me GeminiBrian, what made the dinosaur extinct?

Humans killed them off.

Evidence that Humans and Dinosaurs lived at the same time

Cheers.

[GeminiBrian]

Quote by: brisbane buddy tell me geminibrian, what made the dinosaur extinct? Cheers.

your point being?

[nerdvincent]

Quote by: brisbane buddy Tell me GeminiBrian, what made the dinosaur extinct? Cheers.

ETs

We've found the 65.10^6 years old crater, iridium concentration have a peak in the earth level corresponding to 65.10^6 years ago (and much more I'm too lazy to enumerate)... and 65 million yo fossils. Hardly any scientist deny an asteroid impact. Then there is also the Deccan Traps.

Anyway, I'm not there to make you a biology lesson. Try wikipedia.

[GeminiBrian]

Quote by: shawmutt Humans killed them off. Evidence that Humans and Dinosaurs lived at the same time

Slight problem there, shawmut. Dinosaur and human fossils have never been found in the same geological strata, the main way of establishing co-existence, along with laboratory dating procedures.

According to the reasoning in the link you provided, pictures on pots etc. can be relied on as proof. By the same token, you might argue that all those medieval paintings of St. George and the dragon depict real-life events, with real fire-breathing mythical monsters... It's called Artistic License.

[ItsDarts]

Quote by: brisbane buddy Tell me GeminiBrian, what made the dinosaur extinct? Cheers.

Irrelevant, stick to the topic.

[brisbane buddy]

Quote by: GeminiBrian your point being?

Answer the question Gemini and you might find out.

What made the dinosaur extinct?

Cheers.

[brisbane buddy]

Quote by: ItsDarts Irrelevant, stick to the topic.

Knowledge may be irrelevant to you ItsDarts, it isn't to everybody, particularly when it relates to the topic. You do though have to have knowledge to understand this.

Cheers.

[ItsDarts]

Quote by: brisbane buddy Knowledge may be irrelevant to you ItsDarts, it isn't to everybody, particularly when it relates to the topic. You do though have to have knowledge to understand this. Cheers.

Extinction of dinosaurs have nothing to do with this debate. It appears you're setting up some bate and switch or one of the other strawmen you always bring into a topic rather than addressing the actual points of a debate.

Brian, its your thread, so answer if you like, but personally I'd ask him to bring his point out in the open before you commit to an answer and if he refuses in his next post, report him. But that's just me.

[brisbane buddy]

Quote by: ItsDarts Extinction of dinosaurs have nothing to do with this debate. It appears you're setting up some bate and switch or one of the other strawmen you always bring into a topic rather than addressing the actual points of a debate. Brian, its your thread, so answer if you like, but personally I'd ask him to bring his point out in the open before you commit to an answer and if he refuses in his next post, report him. But that's just me.

Wow don't you have a suspicious and devious nature, I won't ask where you derived that strawman from, I already know it comes from your own life experience.

Truth and knowledge must really scare the hell out of you that you would want to try and shut down debate.

Cheers.

[Matt W]

Enough. Stick to the topic from now on. And enough of the personal comments & attacks. From everybody. This is a debate forum, so debate. Don't flame.

DO NOT RESPOND IN THIS THREAD TO THE PRECEDING MESSAGE. Please contact a member of the staff privately if you have any questions.

[Goyboy]

Quote by: GeminiBrian And surely, anything worth achieving cannot be gained without some pretty determined individual effort.

If God were to exist, then He would possess the authority and the ability to dictate the requirements for gaining His favor, which would be worth gaining.

Suppose that God did exist. Suppose that He were to declare that it's impossible for anyone to earn His favor. Suppose that He were to declare that only through God's grace could anyone have God's favor.

In such a case, individual effort would be futile, because God's favor would be completely unearnable. In order to receive God's favor, one would have to accept it as a gift from God.

[grandpa]

Quote by: Goyboy If God were to exist, then He would possess the authority and the ability to dictate the requirements for gaining His favor, which would be worth gaining.

Nothing, not even a theory about God, can exist to us without our being here to learn about him/her/it. And so, as a matter of fact, "God" (be it fact or fiction) has to gain our attention before we can decide that he/she/it is worthy of it. By elementary observation alone, agnosticism and atheism should be gaining ground.

Grandpa h.

[GeminiBrian]

Quote by: Goyboy If God were to exist, then He would possess the authority and the ability to dictate the requirements for gaining His favor, which would be worth gaining. Suppose that God did exist. Suppose that He were to declare that it's impossible for anyone to earn His favor. Suppose that He were to declare that only through God's grace could anyone have God's favor. In such a case, individual effort would be futile, because God's favor would be completely unearnable. In order to receive God's favor, one would have to accept it as a gift from God.

Wot - no dinosaurs?

So many suppositions here, Goyboy! Nevertheless, let's go with some of them to try and retrieve this debate from descending into farce.

You don't really draw any conclusions from your hypothetical scenario as far as I can see.

Supposing for a minute that god did exist, it doesn't automatically follow that we would actually want his favour - not unless he could prove that he was worthy of being respected, let alone worshipped. If you look to the bible for a character sketch of god, you can't escape the impression that here we have an egocentric, vainglorious, megalomaniac, mass-murdering tyrant... and that's being generous. He also seems to have been asleep on the job for the last 2000 years, or maybe he just realised what a mess he'd made of running the show and disappeared to another dimension to try another of his little experiments with new playthings.

So it doesn't necessarily follow that anybody would be impressed enough to want to follow his commandments in the first place. Least of all in these slightly more enlightened times, when we have far too much evidence from recent history of how destructive such tyrants usually are.

In this context, I fail to see what 'grace' is actually on offer from such a deity, ('grace' being a word I am very familiar with from my Christian up-bringing). This isn't arrogance on my part, as you probably think, but a clear realisation that I myself seem to have fewer moral and ethical faults than the biblical Jehovah, whatever my failings.

Under those circumstances, what incentive would I have, (other than a terror of ending up in hell) to voluntarily seek for a favour or a gift from someone I had no respect for? It's no wonder that the whiff of fire and brimstone hangs so heavily over the whole business of salvation - without such crude threats, god's power over the human imagination would soon wither and die - just as it is doing, as humanity steadily advances towards more enlightened times.

So I don't think individual effort is futile: and it disturbs me to think that you see things only in terms of rewards - earned or otherwise... does that mean that since God doesn't exist (as is probably the case) - nobody has the motivation to be the best he can be? I think I can trust my innate higher instincts to prevent me from causing harm, and my innate respect for others to prompt me to be kind and considerate... (at least away from this forum)... and you would probably find the same thing.

ps. If you are not a theist, goyboy, please read the above in theoretical terms.

[Goyboy]

Quote by: shawmutt Quote: Quote by: brisbane buddy Tell me GeminiBrian, what made the dinosaur extinct? Humans killed them off. Evidence that Humans and Dinosaurs lived at the same time

Congratulations, shawmutt. You have just proven GeminiBrian's point.

And, no, humans and dinosaurs didn't live at the same time. The pseudo-science supporting your claim was debunked a long time ago.

I, too, can provide a hyperlink to a website to support my claim.
Here it is: Paluxy Dinosaur/"Man Track" controversy

By the way, that webpage that you provide a link to is the most unscientific website that I have encountered in a long time. It begins by subjecting science to a particular religious litmus test, which is a violation of the rules of science.

Plus, the website uses shoddy biblical scholarship. Nowhere does the Bible mention dinosaurs, and the only dragon mentioned in the Bible is Satan.


Oh, in case you are wondering, I am not an evolutionist. I am a Legoist.

[GeminiBrian]

Quote by: ItsDarts Extinction of dinosaurs have nothing to do with this debate. It appears you're setting up some bate and switch or one of the other strawmen you always bring into a topic rather than addressing the actual points of a debate. Brian, its your thread, so answer if you like, but personally I'd ask him to bring his point out in the open before you commit to an answer and if he refuses in his next post, report him. But that's just me.

I agree, Darts.

I see no point in answering the OP for the very reasons you point out. If I could comprehend where he was going with this, I would make an effort to rise to his challenge - but I am too obtuse, and words fail me.

[Goyboy]

Quote by: GeminiBrian If Christian belief leads to the denial of established scientific knowledge and facts, such belief encourages intellectual laziness.

The Christian faith doesn't lead to the denial of established scientific knowledge and facts. It is a particular belief about Bible interpretation that leads to such a denial.

I am happy to report that not all Christians support such a belief. Unfortunately, the Christians who do support it get all of the publicity and, at the same time, bring shame to the Christian faith.

Centuries ago Augustine the Bishop of Hippo wrote against the practice of denying scientific knowledge. Here is what he said*:

Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of the world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and the seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones and so forth, and this knowledge he holds as to being certain from reason and experience. Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men. If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason? Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion[1 Tim. 1:7].

[*Quote copied from Creationsim On Trial.]

[GeminiBrian]

[QUOTE]

Quote by: Goyboy The Christian faith doesn't lead to the denial of established scientific knowledge and facts. It is a particular belief about Bible interpretation that leads to such a denial.

That may be true, but I still maintain that the overall effect of Christianity down the ages has been to suppress the search for new knowledge, with plenty of book-burnings and prosecutions for heresy to testify to the fact.... Darwin's ridicule at the hands of the theological authorities is another case in point - and that was relatively recent.

Granted, there are exceptions (including you, I take it) who's need is to reconcile scripture with scientific fact. I can only say, I wouldn't like to be in your debating shoes, because any answer you come up with will inevitably be a 'fudge.' (Just look at our English Archbishops, desperately trying to have it both ways, and making less and less sense - at least the die-hard fundamentalists are consistent in their ugly ravings by comparison).

I am happy to report that not all Christians support such a belief. Unfortunately, the Christians who do support it get all of the publicity and, at the same time, bring shame to the Christian faith.

You sound ambivalent, goyboy. You seem to be keeping your religious affiliations close to your chest at this point - so I can only assume that you retain some theistic beliefs, albeit unorthodox ones... The main trouble with that is that (IMO) you simultaneously dilute the orthodox doctrines in a fairly arbitrary way, and still fail to fully come on board the atheist boat with full conviction.

Centuries ago Augustine the Bishop of Hippo wrote against the practice of denying scientific knowledge. Here is what he said*:

I'm very impressed with this quote - I hadn't come across it before - so thanks for highlighting it.

St. Augustine may have had a more sinister side (like most of the church fathers) but he had his head screwed on in this instance.

I guess his modern counterparts are among us still - in the form of the Archbishops I mentioned earlier - they all know in their inner minds that the religion they promulgate is at grave odds with their educated, rationalist instincts, but have simply too much emotional energy invested in Christianity to allow them to make the honest intellectual leap that they know will have to be made sooner or later, if they are to remain honest to themselves... that takes courage.