“Stop following me! We’re not related!”

[Jay Follett]

I am not talking about the Bible I am talking about science. You have to be a literal - fundalmental - dispensationist to accept science. Unless you reject science. There are atheists that are so dedicated to being atheists that they reject science to maintain their atheism. Perhaps you do not understand. A dispensation is an age. For example the ice age would be a dispensation. Actually there were 6 ice ages. Science is very dispensational. Literal means you accept the artifacts and the natural evidence at its face value. You do not take a fossil and say maybe this is symbolic and maybe it means something different from what it looks to represent. I am a literal, fundamental dispensationalist for science and for religion. They all add up to God and science does not contradict religion. In fact science and religion compliment each other. If you maintain truth and integrity.

That's only because you don't know anything about science, you are like the person who says they don't like curry but have never tasted curry, you try to criticise science but you know nothing about science.
You think that because you have no evidence for what want to believe everyone must be in the same boat as you,
science is all about evidence and has nothing to do with faith, faith is used when there is no evidence which means faith is kept solely for religions, faith is used no where else in life and if you think that it is then you're wrong again.

 

[Jimmy D]

I am not talking about the Bible I am talking about science. You have to be a literal - fundalmental - dispensationist to accept science. Unless you reject science. There are atheists that are so dedicated to being atheists that they reject science to maintain their atheism. Perhaps you do not understand. A dispensation is an age. For example the ice age would be a dispensation. Actually there were 6 ice ages. Science is very dispensational. Literal means you accept the artifacts and the natural evidence at its face value. You do not take a fossil and say maybe this is symbolic and maybe it means something different from what it looks to represent. I am a literal, fundamental dispensationalist for science and for religion. They all add up to God and science does not contradict religion. In fact science and religion compliment each other. If you maintain truth and integrity.

These atheists rejecting science to maintain their atheism, who are they and how are they doing it?

 

[joshua 1 9]

These atheists rejecting science to maintain their atheism, who are they and how are they doing it?

There are atheists here on the forum that will reject scientific evidence to maintain their atheism. Not all of them, some of the atheists maintain their integrity and some don't

 

[joshua 1 9]

That's only because you don't know anything about science,

If I do not know anything about science then we are all in trouble because I know more about science then 97% of the people alive today. I know more about evolution then the vast majority of the people alive in the world today. That is not saying much because even if you only read one science book you know more then most of the people. I read the "The Double Helix" back in the 60"s when it first came out. Recently I was reading one of Francis Collins books that talks about how just about everything we thought we knew about DNA 10 years ago has proven not to be true. There is an amazing book that I read written by Debra Neihoff called: "The language of life: How cells communicate in Health and Disease". So if you just go by any of those three books that I am ready to discuss with you then that pretty well falsifies your notion that I "don't know anything about science". Perhaps you are the one that does not know anything about science. Usually we are guilty of what we accuse others of.

 

[AV1611VET]

No AV1611VET it's not, for an atheist to claim there was no god would be as bad as a theist claiming there was a god,

Then what would you call someone who claims there is no God? a fool?

 

[Jay Follett]

Then what would you call someone who claims there is no God? a fool?

Perhaps not a fool but definitely misguided because how would they know?
They could of course claim to know in the same way you do, by faith, it's your answer so why can't it be theirs?
Who is right you or them and why?

 

[PsychoSarah]

If there is no evidence then it takes just as much faith to be an atheist as it does to be a theist. When the good news is preached we read that: "The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is proclaimed to the poor." This is understood to have physical and spiritual meaning. To be deaf, dumb, blind and lame in the physical is a shadow and a type of being spiritually deaf, dumb, blind and lame.

Nope, it takes as much evidence to be a gnostic atheist as it does to be a gnostic theist. Agnostic atheists don't believe due to a lack of evidence, not the presence of any. Same somewhat goes to agnostic theists, although their belief in a deity doesn't really follow with what the default position without evidence is supposed to be (if there isn't any evidence for something, you're not supposed to assume it exists anyways).

 

[joshua 1 9]

Agnostic atheists don't believe due to a lack of evidence, .

There was a time in my life when it was difficult to trust and believe God. Yet I had nothing to lose and everything to gain. So more and more I would trust in Him and more and more He proved Himself to be trustworthy.

 

[PsychoSarah]

There was a time in my life when it was difficult to trust and believe God. Yet I had nothing to lose and everything to gain. So more and more I would trust in Him and more and more He proved Himself to be trustworthy.

That's an emotional argument that won't satisfy the degree of evidence necessary for me to believe. Perceived gains or losses are not a logical reason to believe anything.

 

[PsychoSarah]

The operative word in all of that is "Could".

Any reason not to believe something that has no evidence to back it up is a good reason not to believe it.
Can you think of any reason (other than it feels good) why you should believe something that has no evidence to back it up?

For the sake of mental health. A lot of people cannot handle the idea that death is the end. I teeter on suicidal, the only thing stopping me from killing myself being the fear of oblivion, and yet it is that same fear that is the source of my depression and on and off nihilism.

There is also the undeniable fact that religion does make people come together and connect with each other, and that religious people tend to live longer than those that are not thanks to these communities and sense of belonging all social species crave. It's not the only means to that end, but that doesn't mean it isn't a valid one.

You could claim that all of that falls under "feeling good", but to me, that would simply mean that feeling good is more worthwhile a reason than the wording would imply.

 

[The Cadet]

Yet I had nothing to lose and everything to gain.

You have quite a bit to lose. Your moral compass, for example, as you're forced to hand over the reins of what you think is "moral" or "immoral" to an ancient religion. You lose the intellectual high ground. You sacrifice your rationality at the altar of religion. And, of course, it's entirely possible that by believing, you have everything to lose, as if we're simply wagering, then why is it not possible that a God set up the world as a test, and the only people who go on to heaven are those who were rational enough to realize that there's simply no good reason to believe and reject religion? In that case, you'd be on your way to hell, and that would be awful!

 

[joshua 1 9]

You have quite a bit to lose. Your moral compass, for example, as you're forced to hand over the reins of what you think is "moral" or "immoral" to an ancient religion. You lose the intellectual high ground. You sacrifice your rationality at the altar of religion. And, of course, it's entirely possible that by believing, you have everything to lose, as if we're simply wagering, then why is it not possible that a God set up the world as a test, and the only people who go on to heaven are those who were rational enough to realize that there's simply no good reason to believe and reject religion? In that case, you'd be on your way to hell, and that would be awful!

What does any of this have to do with creation and evolution?

 

[The Cadet]

What does any of this have to do with creation and evolution?

There was a time in my life when it was difficult to trust and believe God. Yet I had nothing to lose and everything to gain. So more and more I would trust in Him and more and more He proved Himself to be trustworthy.

Same to you, buddy.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Same to you, buddy.

People ask questions, I answer their questions and sometimes they do not like the answer. With true science you have to go where the evidence leads you. Now I am beginning to see a disease that has crept into science in an attempt to defile it. But the truth will always prevail.

 

[joshua 1 9]

That's an emotional argument that won't satisfy the degree of evidence necessary for me to believe. Perceived gains or losses are not a logical reason to believe anything.

I am just explaining the process. If your not interested that is fine but you need to make up your mind and decide because you keep flipping back and forth.

The imagination is very powerful. There is a women named Kat Kerr that has a lot of videos on Youtube. She tries to teach people how to use their imagination for good and how to overcome our fears.

 

[Jay Follett]

For the sake of mental health. A lot of people cannot handle the idea that death is the end. I teeter on suicidal, the only thing stopping me from killing myself being the fear of oblivion, and yet it is that same fear that is the source of my depression and on and off nihilism.

You at least recognise the fact that you are ill, you know you should not feel the way you do and you know you will eventually overcome those feelings one day.
Depression is a terrible thing and it's one of the worst disorders to overcome but people do overcome it every day, the understanding that everything dies means you should be no more worried about it than any other living thing, it might not be much consolation but there are about six or seven billion people living on this planet and 95% of them are a lot worse off than you and me.

I am very lucky because of where I live, I live in a part of the UK know as the 'Cotswolds'*, it's full of very old villages and virtually every one of them has a village pub, there is nothing nicer than to sit outside (as long as it's not raining) or inside if it is raining and have a half of beer and let your cares just drift away, they say you never notice things that are on your doorstep well it's true, I only started to drive around some of the other villages when my local village pub was closed for a month to make it structurally sound, it needed work because it was built around 1550 so it's starting to show it's age now.

* The Cotswolds is a rural area of south central England covering parts of 6 counties, notably Gloucestershire and Oxfordshire. Its rolling hills and grassland harbour thatched medieval villages, churches and stately homes built of distinctive local yellow limestone.

For Americans who have trouble pronouncing English county names,
Gloucestershire is pronounced = Glosstersher
Oxfordshire is pronounced = Oxfudsher
Worcestershire is pronounced = Wusstersher.

 

[PsychoSarah]

You at least recognise the fact that you are ill, you know you should not feel the way you do and you know you will eventually overcome those feelings one day.

Pretty sure I will never reconcile with my own inevitable death, and that I will die "kicking and screaming" like over 10% of people do.

Depression is a terrible thing and it's one of the worst disorders to overcome but people do overcome it every day, the understanding that everything dies means you should be no more worried about it than any other living thing, it might not be much consolation but there are about six or seven billion people living on this planet and 95% of them are a lot worse off than you and me.

Pretty sure every living thing with the capacity to have thoughts, and even some that arguably don't, fear death. A lot. Also, mentioning that there are people that are worse off than me doesn't make me feel better; it makes me feel bad for feeling bad.

I am very lucky because of where I live, I live in a part of the UK know as the 'Cotswolds'*, it's full of very old villages and virtually every one of them has a village pub, there is nothing nicer than to sit outside (as long as it's not raining) or inside if it is raining and have a half of beer and let your cares just drift away, they say you never notice things that are on your doorstep well it's true, I only started to drive around some of the other villages when my local village pub was closed for a month to make it structurally sound, it needed work because it was built around 1550 so it's starting to show it's age now.

My generalized anxiety related to autism means I am literally incapable of never feeling worried except when I sleep, and my severe ADHD takes precedence for treatment, so my anxiety cannot be treated and my ADHD treatment makes it worse.

* The Cotswolds is a rural area of south central England covering parts of 6 counties, notably Gloucestershire and Oxfordshire. Its rolling hills and grassland harbour thatched medieval villages, churches and stately homes built of distinctive local yellow limestone.

For Americans who have trouble pronouncing English county names,
Gloucestershire is pronounced = Glosstersher
Oxfordshire is pronounced = Oxfudsher
Worcestershire is pronounced = Wusstersher.

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha. I always end up laughing when I see people from the United Kingdom complain about how people in the United States don't pronounce things right. It's fully intentional; after the country was founded, delegates decided that to distance themselves from their British origins by changing up the meanings, pronunciations, and spellings/rules of multiple words, so that future generations of U.S. citizens wouldn't sound British. The founders of the country made their own English dialect, like a 1700s middle finger that remains to this day, and actually continues to annoy the people it was intended to insult.

Glow-chest-er-shy-er
Ox-ford-shy-er
War-chest-er-shy-er
With variations depending on what part of the country you are in. This one applies mostly to the Midwest, which is where I have been in that country the most.

You'll also often find both the pronunciations and spellings in American English tend to be easier than United Kingdom English, with some exceptions. To try to stay away from bias, I recommend getting a person that has English as their second language to try it out for you, given that you are very used to speaking and writing one way.

Out of curiosity, how do you think these U.S. counties are supposed to be pronounced?

VanBuren
Allegan
Auglaize
Ashtabula
De Kalb
Tippecanoe

 

[Herman Hedning]

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha. I always end up laughing when I see people from the United Kingdom complain about how people in the United States don't pronounce things right. It's fully intentional; after the country was founded, delegates decided that to distance themselves from their British origins by changing up the meanings, pronunciations, and spellings/rules of multiple words, so that future generations of U.S. citizens wouldn't sound British. The founders of the country made their own English dialect, like a 1700s middle finger that remains to this day, and actually continues to annoy the people it was intended to insult.

If by delegates you mean Noah Webster in the early 1800:s, then that is mostly correct. He did at least in part select variant spellings for patriotic reasons. No one has consciously made an american dialect though. Instead, spoken american is more like British english was in the 1700:s and has remained more or less constant, whereas the spoken language in Britain has evolved quite a bit.

 

[Jay Follett]

Out of curiosity, how do you think these U.S. counties are supposed to be pronounced?

VanBuren
Allegan
Auglaize
Ashtabula
De Kalb
Tippecanoe

I have no idea because they are not English words so the pronunciation of the letters is unknown to me.
Like the French word for Yes is Oui which is pronounced oowee.
The Welsh word for police is Heddu which is pronounced Hethlee.

 

[PsychoSarah]

I have no idea because they are not English words so the pronunciation of the letters is unknown to me.
Like the French word for Yes is Oui which is pronounced oowee.
The Welsh word for police is Heddu which is pronounced Hethlee.

The point was for you to try, not cop out XD