-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Teaching evolution to young Christian skeptics
- Thread starter Stoney Mason
- Start date
- Status
ronito said:
Does the Bible not make a point of saying to not count the days? My uncle's pointed me the verse at one point (two of my uncles are pastors actually). I don't think we're supposed to be interpreting the age of the world, and even if we are, it's really of no significance.
ManaByte
Member
bastionwords said:
My Church goes verse-by-verse from Genesis to Revelation, using inductive study (which means the context is explained with each verse). Non-denominational ftw.
bastionwords said:
Because they don't know what they're talking about?
bastionwords said:
Just because one Church is completely wrong in their interpretation of the New Testament teachings; it doesn't mean all of Christianity is. There's a very large movement right now in the Emerging Church that teaches that Christ isn't the only way to Heaven; which ignores John 14:6.
Jesus said to him, I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.
Why would the Bible go through great length and detail to give you the days if you're supposed to ignore it? Is it just baiting you?TheExodu5 said:
Also Christ himself also said nothing about gays, some verses hint that life doesn't begin until after the third trimester (the quickening) so I guess some interpretations are ok and others aren't. Gotcha.
speculawyer
Member
Swedomu said:
Wow, look at Turkey.
But the kicker is that Turkey is pretty much the most progressive country in the entire Islamic world. :-(
It makes you wonder how low Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen, etc. would rank. :-(
We need to get off oil . . . sending these people trillions of dollars is not a good idea.
That was an interesting read. I don't think I'd have the patience to be that teacher. Some brain-washed punk gives me lip I'd call him on his stupidity. He also impressed me with the way he bit his lip in regards to the "science" teacher across the hall. It really makes me sick to think that bitch would use her position as a publicly funded pulpit rather than actually doing her job. I guess in their area the majority of tax-payers are cool with having their kids raised ignorant and oblivious.
When I think about it most people don't really need to know about evolution anyway. So I guess it's pointless to get angry at parents that willingly force ignorance on their children and shield them from learning about it.
When I think about it most people don't really need to know about evolution anyway. So I guess it's pointless to get angry at parents that willingly force ignorance on their children and shield them from learning about it.
deepbrown said:
No, my morality does not come from the bible. what DOES come from the bible, are a bunch of stories, that are quite uplifting, and give me an insight into what a wonder it all is, We're alive. thats pretty fucking impressive. why not write a story about it, something, something for our kids to enjoy. lets call it the bible.
also, i dont pick and choose my morals from the bible, i pick and chose them as i see fit. It just so happens, that the majority of them in the bible are correct. And really i think this is on a whole other level to the level of religious devotion in Australia, it's quite astounding.
really now its 3:20 and i'm even more delusional.. but if your point was do i get my sense of morals only from the bible? no.
do i beleive anything in the bible? no.
the bible was written before scientific fact (well a whole lot of it) came to use.
The Aboriginals of Australia tell of stories such as the magpie being black and white because he was caught in a bush fire.
What gives the Christian story more fact over theirs? do you have me pictures of said jesus playing cricket on the shores of Jerusalem?
also nothing personnel on you anyway, I've had a shit day at home with many an argument and I'm really just using the internet to vent! no assholery intended!
bastionwords said:
It shouldn't be. I can't speak for any specific denomination or congregation. I can only offer to you that Biblically speaking, they are in the wrong. The Levitical laws do not apply to Christians. I'm sure there are many good reasons for Christians to study and understand them, but they do not directly apply to Christians. That was another law, for another people.
besada said:
I'd suggest you use your God or Evolution given intelligence to do so. I don't care which, just pick the one you believe in and use it.
The Bible also speaks of Peter being the rock on which Christ would build his church. That is literal too, I suppose.theBishop said:
You're absolutely correct. He was a Jew, and until his death and resurrection, he and everyone else were governed by and had to uphold the law. I believe Jesus himself stated that he came not to destroy the Law, but to fulfill it. Until he had done so, he couldn't command people in any way that would lead to them violating their law/covenant.
bastionwords
Member
Too bad my experience isn't one church! I kinda of grew up in a baptist church, attended a non-denominational church and been to a shit load of christian gatherings. It is there, and you simple statement does not admonish this. The pick and choose of scriptures by Christian is a very widespread activity. Once again, your simple statements do not dilute the overwhelming evidence of experience from my head. I know the talk, so your simple arguments to paint a different picture will not change the conclusion in my head. However, you are not even addressing the topic at hand. You are trying to be the victor by posting as much scripture as possible.ManaByte said:
Once again, I will ask (not just to manabyte) why does science have to be sensitive to religion?
speculawyer
Member
You know what is a really incorrect and disingenuous move? Sticking words into someone else's mouth. If you want to cite me, there is a quote function attached to every message I post.Azih said:
But just making shit up? Well . . . I guess if you don't have a good case that is what you need to do.
Well it makes it easier to ignore willful ignorance. Their son is going to shuck corn when he grows up. Why bother him with evolution? Their daughter is going to knit clothes and cook all day. What does she need with evolution?theBishop said:
I know my examples aren't completely accurate and there are a lot of people in positions of power and other seemingly well-educated persons with those beliefs. My little fantasy just makes it easier for me to stomach the reality of the situation.
speculawyer
Member
So . . . do all these non-denominational Churches teach the Bible in the exact same way? :lolManaByte said:
You know, the New Testament is filled with massive piles of crap too. Jesus talked about slaves . . . why didn't he ever suggest that they should be freed? Are you pro-slavery on Biblical ground as much of the American south was (and to some degree still is)?ManaByte said:
Dali said:
I guess I have kind of an idealized view of education. Doctors have the Hippocratic Oath, I think educators have a similar responsibility to their profession. Subjects should be taught according to the best understanding at the time, not according to the irrational "values" of the parents of the student.
ManaByte
Member
Tamanon said:I can certainly tell by the arguments used against gay marriage. So are you saying that anyone who does quote Leviticus is not a Christian?
If they're quoting from Leviticus; they're wrong. Those same arguments are found in the New Testament; specifically by Paul in his letter to the Romans.
Herpes Reasons
Banned
what's your definition of the new covenant between man and GOD?ronito said:
Kaervas said:
as i see fit from all walks of life.
i asked my cousin to edit it but he failed.
I see a kitten get strangled, and the man arrested, hmm thats not nice, i frown uponst him.
I read about jesus telling us the parable about the samaratin, hey thats good, what a nice gesture.
4am. 4am.
But really from what i've seen this is just a major problem in America, even the crazy Kiwi guy who posted earlier pointed out that evolution is a staple of education. lol kiwis!
Jason's Ultimatum
Member
I always get the "But if we evolved from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?" comment from the anti-evolutioners. :lol
ronito said:
Well, Christ himself doesn't personally speak out against the Homosexuals but his teachings show that it is considered a transgression against God's will.
And He answered and said to them, Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning made them male and female, and said, For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh? (Matt. 19:4.)
Jesus obviously shows that he, as the Son of God, believes in the Fathers will that Man and Woman are only to be joined together.
I do not want to derail this thread to speak about anything other than Science and Faith, but I just wanted to address that for Ronito.
And for anyone who is curious about my involvement in this thread, I'd just like the point out that while I come from a Christian upbringing, my education is in anthropology and archaeology. So, when I comment on these things I try to do so from more of a historical standpoint. That is, I don't want to comment on a specific denomination or set of beliefs, but rather simply a commentary on the Biblical account itself and the story/history it presents. I'm happy to argue in its defense when I think people misinterpret it, but I am not interested in its rightness or accuracy as compared to science.
As I made an attempt to explain above, I am not trying to "defend my faith" in this thread. However, I will say that to a Christian, the entire Bible should be relevant. It is or should be, at the very least, a history of Christianity and where it came from. It is relevant. I believe what you want to ask would more accurately be, "are the only parts of the Bible that you uphold as being commandments to Christians those that are given after the resurrection?" To that I would have to say, yes. While Jesus was alive and on this earth, according to the Bible, he followed the Law of the Old Testament. I think, if you look at the things he did and said you will see that as being accurate.
Now, that doesn't mean that everything he said suddenly no longer applies to Christians. Much of it dealt with simply being a "good" person, and was later represented in some way in the Bible after his resurrection as well.
I realize that the goal of threads like this is to be as facetious as possible in hopes of getting some "wacky Christian" to step all over themselves in defending their faith, but come on. I think at this point you understand my point. I'm not here to argue for or against evolution. I have only one college level biology class, and little outside study in the area. I was content to just read (as I was interested in the topic) but only jumped in to correct an issue for which I actually have specific knowledge.
theBishop said:
As I made an attempt to explain above, I am not trying to "defend my faith" in this thread. However, I will say that to a Christian, the entire Bible should be relevant. It is or should be, at the very least, a history of Christianity and where it came from. It is relevant. I believe what you want to ask would more accurately be, "are the only parts of the Bible that you uphold as being commandments to Christians those that are given after the resurrection?" To that I would have to say, yes. While Jesus was alive and on this earth, according to the Bible, he followed the Law of the Old Testament. I think, if you look at the things he did and said you will see that as being accurate.
Now, that doesn't mean that everything he said suddenly no longer applies to Christians. Much of it dealt with simply being a "good" person, and was later represented in some way in the Bible after his resurrection as well.
I realize that the goal of threads like this is to be as facetious as possible in hopes of getting some "wacky Christian" to step all over themselves in defending their faith, but come on. I think at this point you understand my point. I'm not here to argue for or against evolution. I have only one college level biology class, and little outside study in the area. I was content to just read (as I was interested in the topic) but only jumped in to correct an issue for which I actually have specific knowledge.
ManaByte
Member
Gaborn said:
Paul's letters were after Christ gave the Great Commission to the disciples and he was writing to the early Church that was made up of both Gentiles and Jews. The Jews wanted to keep the Torah, so Paul wrote his epistle to settle the differences between them and the Greek Gentiles also in the Roman Church.
Matthew 28:16-20
16 Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, to the mountain which Jesus had appointed for them. 17 When they saw Him, they worshiped Him; but some doubted.
18 And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age. Amen.
Its really disheartening to see people say things like "oh well, we dont really need to know about evolution, if they dont want to believe in it; good on em!!" in 2008. Modern medicine, our understanding of genetics and our own DNA and so much more has sprung from Darwin's work in the fucking 1800's. Are people on here really comfortable knowing that what their kids might be learning in highschool biology might not be up to scratch and embracing a wilful ingorance of information developed from 150 FUCKING YEARS AGO?
This is when I find religion can't be respected, nor tolerated when it actually encroaches on the intellectual advancement of society to such a degree. By all means still believe in your chosen spirituality, but you will have to work it/retcon it around Evolution, because that is what happened.
This is when I find religion can't be respected, nor tolerated when it actually encroaches on the intellectual advancement of society to such a degree. By all means still believe in your chosen spirituality, but you will have to work it/retcon it around Evolution, because that is what happened.
I totally don't get the conflict between creationism and evolution.
Evolution is merely a process. It says nothing about the origins of the process. There could still have been a creator who designed the process, with the notion of humans as the end-output of that process, and then set it in motion. Or not. Point is, it speaks nothing, for or against, a creator God.
Even my 70-odd year-old Catholic parents, raised in an exceptionally conservative Ireland, can accept evolution theory.
Evolution is merely a process. It says nothing about the origins of the process. There could still have been a creator who designed the process, with the notion of humans as the end-output of that process, and then set it in motion. Or not. Point is, it speaks nothing, for or against, a creator God.
Even my 70-odd year-old Catholic parents, raised in an exceptionally conservative Ireland, can accept evolution theory.
I sort of agree, which is why I am so pissed that people like the female teacher exist. At the same time if you live in an idiot village you want your schools to teach your idiot village lessons. I'm torn between my feelings on the two. I think teachers should be objective and have a duty to their profession to have students prepared for the world and more intelligent when they leave than when they got there. Just like you have bad doctors though you also have piss-poor teachers who think they are fulfilling their duty when they really are an embarrassment to their profession. The idiot village hires these piss-poor teachers only they see them as the epitome of excellence.theBishop said:
Dolphin said:
Well, it wasn't merely divorce, but was divorce by any cause. However, Jesus does plainly define marriage and how it is viewed by God. The emphasis is later put on the situation by Jesus explaining that no man shall "put asunder" what God joins together, and that basically states that getting a divorce from your wife/husband by any cause OTHER than unfaithfulness is considered as a transgression.
Still, Jesus' definition of Marriage, be it concerning divorce or homosexual unions, is pretty straight forward. Male + Female = Definition of marriage.
lol, actually it does address being single. Paul (I believe it was Paul) brings up the issue of keeping oneself pure in the eyes of the lord. He states that it is actually GOOD if a person does not marry and that God doesn't look down upon it. However, he explains that if you cant control yourself and you cannot remain celibate then it is a good idea for you to find someone to marry.
A person, in God's eyes, can remain single and unmarried if they remain celibate.
Count Dookkake
Member
Aurvant said:
He actually just says man plus wife.
Wiggle room exists.
Jack Random
Member
TheExodu5 said:
Can you read that to yourself again, and tell me how the hell that makes any sense at all?
You can't make "conditions" where facts are allowed to exist, they simply do.
- Status