A Pondering of the Peculiar (3)

[Mr Strawberry]

If Christianity had such a peer review it could not be equitable for all. Years ago in this forum there took place a major take over of the moderating duties by a certain denomination. I got banned several times for refuting their cherished beliefs. Not for calling names. Not for mocking. But, for refuting their false claims with resolve. Others got what I said and could verify. But, I could not pass peer review because in Christianity we are not all peers. No more than all Americans are peers.

So you didn't break any forum rules at all? Surely they must have said you broke forum rules.

 

[Mr Strawberry]

Well, it is personal to me. But, you do not realize you are mocking my Father.

No, if anything is being mocked, which is debatable, it is your mistaken belief that you have an invisible friend.

 

[Davian]

If you had an uncle who was honest and upright? If he told you that he will be bringing you a gift back for you on return from his vacation? Could you see him bringing you the gift before he saw you again? Once you can know God is real, you can base what you believe to be based upon the trustworthiness of the one telling you what is not yet seen, will be.

How circular. Once you believe it is real, you can base your belief on it.

What good is having an invisible jet, if she is visible? Kind of defeats its purpose. Back to the drawing board.

You are the one positing things invisible that are supposedly clearly seen. Back to the drawing board with you.

If someone hypothesized that a highly developed life form from another galaxy created us? Then you might consider it. After all, statistically, its unfathomable that the genome just happened on its own. It gives genetic orders to the body! What came first? The orders? Or the body?

"In the beginning was the genome."

Or, did the body come first? Then, what good is a body without a genome? And, a genome without a body? If the genome came first then it must have lucked out to produce a body on first try. How? By digesting proteins? Wait.. that would require a digestive system.

What brought about the genome? Non intelligence? I find the position of evolutionists to be a split personality mentality. How can they see how intelligently ordered a genome is, yet still believe its all by chance.

I do not think they believe it was all "chance".

I wanted to inform myself about abiogenisis, so I googled to here: Abiogenesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Here: The Origins of Life | Science & Nature | Smithsonian Magazine

Here: Genesis: The Scientific Quest for Lifes Origins - YouTube

and recently finished listening to this lecture series:

The Great Courses - Origins of Life

01 The Grand Question of Life's Origins.mp3
02 The Historical Setting of Origins Research.mp3
03 What Is Life.mp3
04 Is There Life on Mars.mp3
05 Earth's Oldest Fossils.mp3
06 Fossil Isotopes.mp3
07 Molecular Biosignatures.mp3
08 Emergence.mp3
09 The Miller-Urey Experiment.mp3
10 Life from the Bottom of the Sea.mp3
11 The Deep, Hot Biosphere.mp3
12 Experiments at High Pressure.mp3
13 More Experiments Under Pressure.mp3
14 Deep Space Dust, Molten Rock, and Zeolite.mp3
15 Macromolecules and the Tree of Life.mp3
16 Lipids and Membrane Self-Organization.mp3
17 Life on Clay, Clay as Life.mp3
18 Life's Curious Handedness.mp3
19 Self-Replicating Molecular Systems.mp3
20 Gunter Wachtershauser's Grand Hypothesis.mp3
21 The RNA World.mp3
22 The Pre-RNA World.mp3
23 Natural Selection and Competition.mp3
24 Three Scenarios for the Origin of Life.mp3

You should go through all of that for yourself.

That is character. But anyone who has the work ethic (which had its roots in Protestantism) will have character, no matter what his occupation is. Again, just having your job proves nothing about ones character in itself.

No, it proves something. Wrong again.

It requires intellectual honesty with no agenda blinders on.

Seeing that ID is a religious belief, that would leave it dead in the water.

Well, it is personal to me. But, you do not realize you are mocking my Father.

Produce the victim, this 'father' that you speak of.

 

[Davian]

Martin Luther? What kind of peer review do you think he had?

The better scholars are not shy about publishing their exegesis. You just can not have a peer review by committee. That would be inviting an Inquisition once the corrupt power grabbers worked their way into power. The Church is best wen we have local autonomous churches. Just like your family should be autonomous from other families without some government body telling us all how to run their own households.

No, you need peer review based on testable, falsifiable hypotheses, facts, and evidence. Religion does not do that.

That is why I find it ludicrous when someone like yourself can think Christians should set up a peer review system. Its not a parallel system. You might as well have a peer review of artists and musicians... even writers. Or, a peer review of parents who are rearing children.

Where did I say that peer review would work with religion? You have me confused with someone else.

 

[GenemZ]

So you didn't break any forum rules at all? Surely they must have said you broke forum rules.

You were not here then? An outside forum had to be created just to deal with the problem amongst all those being oppressed by this one denominations point of view.

Then this Forum went haywire and the owner finally sold the forum. After that was done the top heavy moderator situation vanished. No, I was not breaking forum rules. I was breaking the moderator groups imposed rules. I was getting PM's with snooty remarks from moderators. It was unbelievable to witness to.

Christianity can not have peer reviews. It would end up as an Inquisition like was found here at that time if it tried. The best teaching churches will always be a minority.


Here is what Paul said would happen to the Church in later years. And it did.

2 Timothy 4:3

For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine.
Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great
number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.
​

In contrast to Paul's warning it should have been..

James 3:1

Not many should become teachers, my brethren, for you know that
we [teachers] will be judged by a higher standard and with greater
severity.

​

Many who take the position to teach are amateurs with the gift of gab with just literacy to read a passage out of the Bible. Always putting on a front of religiosity or zeal to please the emotions of their hearers.

We should only have a few well studied teachers in comparison to what we find today. But, like Paul said.. many men do not want to tolerate being taught sound doctrine. They hate the discipline it requires. For it would require for them to be going back to school and actually having to concentrate and learn knowledge. Knowledge that is later to be applied when needed. Instead, many want to attend church to have a personal experience with their emotions, not their minds.

There can be no peer review in the Church. All the few good teachers would be oppressed.

 

[Davian]

I did not say I was honest. I simply accept the principle as being sound. If there are to be any Christians who discover what it is that Jesus came to earth to give them to live by, it will require that they be honest when faced with pressure to deflect away from what is needed.

As for myself? I am a liar. Do you believe me?

I am not here to judge your character.

I do find your posting style to be evasive (cutting out parts of my post you don't like) and hypocritical (calling out bullies while self-identifying as a bully).

And, I asked, do you think of your beliefs as flawless?

 

[GenemZ]

Produce the victim, this 'father' that you speak of.

Wait a trillion years. Evolution has not produced him yet.

 

[GenemZ]

I am not here to judge your character.

But, you do.

Do you find that only "honest Christians" agree with you?

You do not even know what you are doing half the time. You assume your mocking attitude is normal and acceptable.

 

[Davian]

But, you do.


You do not even know what you are doing half the time. You assume your mocking attitude is normal and acceptable.

Do you think of your beliefs as flawless?

 

[Davian]

Wait a trillion years. Evolution has not produced him yet.

So your god does not exist yet?

 

[GenemZ]

Do you think of your beliefs as flawless?

Change the subject much?

That's a sign of one's character, too.

 

[bhsmte]

I did not say I was honest. I simply accept the principle as being sound. If there are to be any Christians who discover what it is that Jesus came to earth to give them to live by, it will require that they be honest when faced with pressure to deflect away from what is needed.

As for myself? I am a liar. Do you believe me?

On that point, yes.

 

[GenemZ]

So your god does not exist yet?

No.. your god does not. You need evolution to produce your god. Sadly, that will be trillions of years after you have vaporized into nothingness.

My God always was existing. Time was one of his creations. Only with time can there be a beginning. God's life is outside of time, yet is free to time travel as He pleases. There are going to be the most fantastic history lessons given in eternity. We will be there watching as it happened. I want to pet a T-Rex. You?

 

[bhsmte]

Change the subject much?

That's a sign of one's character, too.

Very legit question. Do you feel there is any chance you could be wrong about your beliefs?

 

[Davian]

Change the subject much?

That's a sign of one's character, too.

That would be you, back in post #667. You said, "He was using the flaws he perceived in believers as his excuse."

Do you think of yourself as flawless? Do you think of your beliefs as flawless?

 

[Davian]

No.. your god does not.
<snip empty rhetoric>

I said, produce the victim, this 'father' that you speak of.

 

[GenemZ]

On that point, yes.

Really? I said... " I am a liar. Do you believe me?"


I did not say I was telling a lie. I said I was a liar.

A person who is a liar, is not the same as someone who may tell an occasional lie.

 

[bhsmte]

Really? I said... " I am a liar. Do you believe me?"


I did not say I was telling a lie. I said I was a liar.

A person who is a liar, is not the same as someone who may tell an occasional lie.

Really? Please explain.

 

[GenemZ]

Very legit question. Do you feel there is any chance you could be wrong about your beliefs?

I have been wrong. Stupid wrong at times. Sure.

One of the traits of humility is the ability to accept correction. Its not about being self effacing. One can be very brave and bold, yet be humble. One can be meek and timid, and be very arrogant.

 

[bhsmte]

I have been wrong. Stupid wrong at times. Sure.

One of the traits of humility is the ability to accept correction. Its not about being self effacing. One can be very brave and bold, yet be humble. One can be meek and timid, and be very arrogant.

You avoided the question at hand. Could you be wrong about your beliefs (your belief in a God)?