Nathan Poe
Well-Known Member
A thoguht, clirus: Why vote for Christian Republicans? What do you expect them to do for you?
Upvote
0
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
How the Democratic Party opposes Christian Principles
- Thread starter clirus
- Start date
A thoguht, clirus: Why vote for Christian Republicans? What do you expect them to do for you?
Clirus, I am thinking where I see where part of the problems lies. I will try to be very patient with you in discussing this. In cutting edge science, scientist need to speculate using all various theories and our combined understanding of contemporaneous knowledge. Some theories are flawed and need revision, some can be tossed out, and some can be accepted with varying degrees of truth.
Many scientist that work on cutting edge theories need to speculate in order to deepen our understanding of the material world You keep using the word faith in a religious context which I think is grossly out of context.
Are you interchanging the word atheist with scientist? There are various origin of life models. Wikipedia provides an introductory into some of them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_life
I admit that there is a degree of this. It must be frustrating to have a belief system attacked and challenged. Perhaps, we can come to a resolution that if atheists stop attacking the Bible using science, then creationists will stop trying to fabricate a pseudo-science into a science.
Science does a good job at explaining the material world.
God and theology explains the spiritual/supernatural/metaphysical world.
We must demarcate science and religion. Creationism is a not a science.
Can you provide a link to this discussion? Do not equate homosexuality with atheism. That is just absurd.
For clarity sake can you list what you think atheistic principles are? I think this might help to clarify some of your issues. Atheism is not a religion.
Creationism is not a science. Please educate yourself on what science is. Many religious people do not feel threaten that evolution is being taught and creationism is not. Why is evolution so threatening to you? Many Christians do not see the theory of evolutions destroying their God. For some reason you do. Why?
Upvote
0
Clirius,
I see the source of the problem here. I think you have a misconception of atheism and what a science is. For clarity's sake and to avoid further confusion can you:
1. Clearly state what you see as Atheistic principles?
2. Clearly state what you think constitute as a science and how science should operate.
After we get over these hurdles, we can hopefully move on to more meaningful discussion.
I see the source of the problem here. I think you have a misconception of atheism and what a science is. For clarity's sake and to avoid further confusion can you:
1. Clearly state what you see as Atheistic principles?
2. Clearly state what you think constitute as a science and how science should operate.
After we get over these hurdles, we can hopefully move on to more meaningful discussion.
Upvote
0
GettinInTune quote
Clirus, I am thinking where I see where part of the problems lies. I will try to be very patient with you in discussing this. In cutting edge science, scientist need to speculate using all various theories and our combined understanding of contemporaneous knowledge. Some theories are flawed and need revision, some can be tossed out, and some can be accepted with varying degrees of truth.
Many scientist that work on cutting edge theories need to speculate in order to deepen our understanding of the material world You keep using the word faith in a religious context which I think is grossly out of context.
Response
I appreciate your patience.
In cutting edge science, scientist need to speculate, but after a period of time the speculation becomes more of a faith than a speculation.
Such is the situation with evolution. Atheistic scientists have speculated for a long time that non living matter became living matter, but they could never prove that non living matter became living matter. This speculation has been going on so long, one has to consider evolution now to be a faith based concept.
Evolution is obviously flawed, because no one has proven non living matter can become living matter. Lots of speculation, but no facts.
It is not acceptable that a flawed theory be taught in the public school system, when the flawed theory is used to directly attacks the Bible.
Science has never factually repudiated anything of the Bible.
Clirus, I am thinking where I see where part of the problems lies. I will try to be very patient with you in discussing this. In cutting edge science, scientist need to speculate using all various theories and our combined understanding of contemporaneous knowledge. Some theories are flawed and need revision, some can be tossed out, and some can be accepted with varying degrees of truth.
Many scientist that work on cutting edge theories need to speculate in order to deepen our understanding of the material world You keep using the word faith in a religious context which I think is grossly out of context.
Response
I appreciate your patience.
In cutting edge science, scientist need to speculate, but after a period of time the speculation becomes more of a faith than a speculation.
Such is the situation with evolution. Atheistic scientists have speculated for a long time that non living matter became living matter, but they could never prove that non living matter became living matter. This speculation has been going on so long, one has to consider evolution now to be a faith based concept.
Evolution is obviously flawed, because no one has proven non living matter can become living matter. Lots of speculation, but no facts.
It is not acceptable that a flawed theory be taught in the public school system, when the flawed theory is used to directly attacks the Bible.
Science has never factually repudiated anything of the Bible.
Upvote
0
GettinInTune quote
I see the source of the problem here. I think you have a misconception of atheism and what a science is. For clarity's sake and to avoid further confusion can you:
1. Clearly state what you see as Atheistic principles?
2. Clearly state what you think constitute as a science and how science should operate.
After we get over these hurdles, we can hopefully move on to more meaningful discussion.
Response
The present day Atheistic Principles are extreme environmentalism, socialism, feminism, pornography, abortion and homosexuality.
Science is observations and experiments that leads to reproducible results. A mathematical equation is worthless unless it can be proven by anyone that tests the equation.
Science (physical and medical) is being used by Atheists to attack the Christian Religion as part of the Cultural War. Atheists want to convince people to have faith/trust in science and medicine instead of God.
There is a cultural war in America between Christians and Atheists. This war is being fought on the battlefield of politics. The battles are in the voting booth. The prize in the cultural war is the hearts, minds and souls of the children. The Atheistic liberal news media greatly influences both domestic and foreign policy by constantly reporting only bad news about Christians, conservatives and Republicans and only good news about atheists, liberals and democrats. The agenda of the Atheistic liberal news media is to promote extreme environmentalism, socialism, feminism, pornography, abortion, homosexuality and the Atheistic Lifestyle by having democrats in control of government.
Now that I have shown how Science, Religion and Politics are interrelated maybe we can move on to meaningful discussion.
I see the source of the problem here. I think you have a misconception of atheism and what a science is. For clarity's sake and to avoid further confusion can you:
1. Clearly state what you see as Atheistic principles?
2. Clearly state what you think constitute as a science and how science should operate.
After we get over these hurdles, we can hopefully move on to more meaningful discussion.
Response
The present day Atheistic Principles are extreme environmentalism, socialism, feminism, pornography, abortion and homosexuality.
Science is observations and experiments that leads to reproducible results. A mathematical equation is worthless unless it can be proven by anyone that tests the equation.
Science (physical and medical) is being used by Atheists to attack the Christian Religion as part of the Cultural War. Atheists want to convince people to have faith/trust in science and medicine instead of God.
There is a cultural war in America between Christians and Atheists. This war is being fought on the battlefield of politics. The battles are in the voting booth. The prize in the cultural war is the hearts, minds and souls of the children. The Atheistic liberal news media greatly influences both domestic and foreign policy by constantly reporting only bad news about Christians, conservatives and Republicans and only good news about atheists, liberals and democrats. The agenda of the Atheistic liberal news media is to promote extreme environmentalism, socialism, feminism, pornography, abortion, homosexuality and the Atheistic Lifestyle by having democrats in control of government.
Now that I have shown how Science, Religion and Politics are interrelated maybe we can move on to meaningful discussion.
Upvote
0
Nathan Poe
Well-Known Member
No, no, no -- Why do you insist on repeating the same falsehoods?
And again...
And another one.
And ending with another one.
Upvote
0
T
The Bellman
Guest
I have alternative at this point but to simply note that you are a liar and your words are not to be trusted. By your fruit are you known, and your fruit is dishonesty. The truth is not in you.
Upvote
0
What sort of time frame are you proposing? Again from the Earth-centered universe to the Big Bang Model took over 2,000 years.
When Newton first developed his theory of gravitation he compared it with the laws of Kepler and Galileo. Even after finding it to agree, he want to confirm it by using observations of the monthly revolution of the moon around the earth to calculate the circumference of the earth. When he found his calculation did not match the measured circumference of the earth, he left his theory. When a new measurement of the earth's circumference was reported, Newton realized that this new circumference did agree with his theory. It wasn't until this happened that he published his law.
Again there is a wide variety of scientist that subscribe to a multitude of belief systems.
Science begins with observation: Observation. A constant feature of scientific inquiry, observation includes both unconditioned observations (prior to any theory) as well as the observation of the experiment and its results.
Since God is transcendental, we cannot observe him. In science we do not start with a given, unobserved, phenomena and build a theory around this unobserved phenomena.. That is simply not how science works.
Evolution is based on observations. Observation then lead to descriptions (i.e hypothesis). Then use your hypothesis to make predictions. Then test, and then you can have reproducible and consistent outcomes.
The theory of evolution is using the scientific method. Creationism implies that God exists and is observable. How is God observable?
Theories stay as theories. When I learned the theory of gravity in high school, I learned the flawed Newtonian theory of gravity.
It is hard to repudiate the Bible using science. Again, science explains the material world. The Bible explains the supernatural world. If we could physically observe Heaven and Hell, we could use science to explain how they work. Since we cannot physically observe Heaven and Hell, we cannot use science to explain how they work. That is why you have your Bible. If you believe in Heaven and Hell (which I do not), then you need your Bible to explain how they work.
Other things like human asexual reproduction has not been observed. As far as science is concern, the Virgin birth of Jesus is discredited. It took a dive, supernatural force to make it happen.
Upvote
0
KomissarSteve
Basileus
As we've pointed out to you time and time again, atheism and these concepts that you list do not necessarily go hand-in-hand. You need to demonstrate that they do if you want us to believe a word you're saying.
Some are, certainly, but the reason for this is because many Christians outright refuse to acknowledge scientific fact. Evangelical Christians are at least as complicit in this polarization between fact and faith as atheists. You really have no one to blame but yourself for this wing of the culture war, clirus.
No there isn't; there is, however, a culture war between the Christian Right and everyone else, who doesn't want to see the Christian Right's theocratic model for society forced upon everyone. This opposition to the Christian Right is made up of Christians and non-Christians. Your view of the debate as somehow between Christians and atheists is not only flawed; it has zero basis in reality.
Upvote
0
Again, atheists do not have a universal set of principles. You can elaborate on extreme.
I do care about my environment and global warming is a concern. I am not sure what you been by socialism; socialism has a wide array of definitions. I do care about females and think that they should be treated as equals. I don't have an issue with pornography. I use it in moderation. Abortion is a touchy subject that can be discussed forever. I advocate personal responsibility in sexual behavior to minimize STDs and unwanted pregnancies. I don't have an issue with homosexuality. I am heterosexual, but I have good friends who are gay. I have an issue with repressed sexuality that leads priests to sexual abuse alter boys. Repressed sexuality can be dated back to the 5th century, thanks to the fallible man, Augustine.
Back when we thought the Earth was the center of the universe, was it wrong for scientist to question otherwise, or should we have listened to the Bible.
Psalm 93:1, Psalm 96:10, and Chronicles 16:30 state that "the world is firmly established, it cannot be moved." Psalm 104:5 says, "[the LORD] set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved." Ecclesiastes 1:5 states that "the sun rises and the sun sets, and hurries back to where it rises."
As an atheist I lack a belief in God. My focus is much more on my fellow man, than God.
As an atheist and a largely underrepresented minority in America , my rights are being challenged by conservative, Christians who typically have a literal interpretation of the Bible instead of a cultivated interpretation of the Bible. The Bible is filled with allegories, metaphors, and symbolism.
Yes, it is all about the children
I believe that it is better for trying to think freely, critically, to be constantly inquisitive, and brutally honest with themselves. It drives me up the wall when I see young children handing out pamphlets on the street trying to save your soul. They were never given the chance to think for themselves. You have FOX news and Bill O'Reilly. Please name these atheistic media.
*Sigh*
The only people who vote Democratic are atheist??? I will probably vote Democratic. I voted for Nader last two times. I have respect for the Republican Jon McCainI do think it is time for me to move on from this thread and onto something more meaningful.
Upvote
0
eighty percent of our budget goes towards defense.
Yes, its supposed to be around forty percent.
But, the US govt spends money it doesn't have.
Eighty percent of the money we have is towards defense, but defense makes up around forty percent of the ENTIRE budget, which does not include the money we don't even have.
Yes, its supposed to be around forty percent.
But, the US govt spends money it doesn't have.
Eighty percent of the money we have is towards defense, but defense makes up around forty percent of the ENTIRE budget, which does not include the money we don't even have.
Upvote
0
there are plenty of republicans who promote the 'atheistic lifestyle'.
lumping christianity into a political party IS NOT the right thing to do.
lumping christianity into a political party IS NOT the right thing to do.
Upvote
0
I think you and I have hit upon a point of agreement. I'm seeing that you do support environmentalism. It's the "extreme environmentalism" you appose. And I agree. I believe it's wrong for environmentalist to blow up logging trucks and logging business for instance. That's pretty extreme stuff. But non-extreme environmentalism has brought us really good things like clean water, sewage treatment plants and recycling. Non-extreme environmentalism is working to clean up dirty rivers like the one running through Portland Oregon, where I live, and in many other places all across America as well.
For me, I see environmentalism as a command from God because he told us to take care of the earth. So it’s a spiritual thing for me. What are your reasons to support environmentalism?
.
Upvote
0
KomissarSteve
Basileus
I think we can all agree that eco-terrorism and what most would define as "extreme environmentalism" is a bad thing.
And therein lies the problem - for I'm not entirely convinced that clirus' definition of "extreme environmentalism" and the rest of the world's match up.
Upvote
0
GettinInTune quote
When Newton first developed his theory of gravitation he compared it with the laws of Kepler and Galileo. Even after finding it to agree, he want to confirm it by using observations of the monthly revolution of the moon around the earth to calculate the circumference of the earth. When he found his calculation did not match the measured circumference of the earth, he left his theory. When a new measurement of the earth's circumference was reported, Newton realized that this new circumference did agree with his theory. It wasn't until this happened that he published his law.
Response
How long should we wait for someone to prove non living matter can become living matter and thus establish evolution as a physical law?
Since God is transcendental, we cannot observe Him, but we can read about Him and check the correctness of the material presented. Until someone proves something in the Bible in wrong, one would have to assume the Bible is perfect.
It is not correct/honest to discredit anything by just presenting an unproven alternative.
Atheists don't like people to question the Atheistic Principles. I think it is the responsibility of Christians to ask question and demand proof.
Christianity requires a little faith, but Atheism requires a lot of faith.
I believe that if people are presented an honest unbiased presentation of the Atheistic Lifestyle and the Christian Lifestyle, they would choose the Christian Lifestyle and the Atheistic Lifestyle would fade back into the closet.
When Newton first developed his theory of gravitation he compared it with the laws of Kepler and Galileo. Even after finding it to agree, he want to confirm it by using observations of the monthly revolution of the moon around the earth to calculate the circumference of the earth. When he found his calculation did not match the measured circumference of the earth, he left his theory. When a new measurement of the earth's circumference was reported, Newton realized that this new circumference did agree with his theory. It wasn't until this happened that he published his law.
Response
How long should we wait for someone to prove non living matter can become living matter and thus establish evolution as a physical law?
Since God is transcendental, we cannot observe Him, but we can read about Him and check the correctness of the material presented. Until someone proves something in the Bible in wrong, one would have to assume the Bible is perfect.
It is not correct/honest to discredit anything by just presenting an unproven alternative.
Atheists don't like people to question the Atheistic Principles. I think it is the responsibility of Christians to ask question and demand proof.
Christianity requires a little faith, but Atheism requires a lot of faith.
I believe that if people are presented an honest unbiased presentation of the Atheistic Lifestyle and the Christian Lifestyle, they would choose the Christian Lifestyle and the Atheistic Lifestyle would fade back into the closet.
Upvote
0
Nathan Poe quote
(Insert your own Larry Craig joke here.)
Response
I want to thank the democrats and the Atheistic Liberal News Media for getting the homosexuals out of the Republican Party.
If the homosexuals were removed from the democratic party and the Atheistic Liberal News Media, there would not be much left.
(Insert your own Larry Craig joke here.)
Response
I want to thank the democrats and the Atheistic Liberal News Media for getting the homosexuals out of the Republican Party.
If the homosexuals were removed from the democratic party and the Atheistic Liberal News Media, there would not be much left.
Upvote
0
