Well...it had to be on the web...

Again, rather than into the origins of man, the religious should do well to look into the origins of religion: a truly liberating experience. With regards to scrupleless people like Pat Robinson, they prey on ignorance and fear, which doesn't give them much credit in my little book. He would probably do well to put on "Jezus, he knows me" by the aptly named Genesis :twisted:
 
Just when I think the televangelists have sunk to the lowest point possible, they prove me wrong by getting even sleazier. Remember when Falwell blamed 9/11 on gays and liberals?
 
Maybe I'm out of line here, but Robertson isn't really Christian. He lives in opulence while dispensing judgement from his ivory tower. He calls for killing, he revels in destruction and the human values of war and injustice. The Christian faith has two very distinct commandments: 1)Love God, and 2) Love one another. As he seems to be against commandment 2) and if we assume that Bible-based Christianity is correct, then you cannot hate mankind and love God.

LOL - Then again, mixing faith and logic is rather explosive.

Look folks, I just want to say that one can be religious and still not ignore or hate the world around them. Since so many Christians (and members of MANY other faiths, mind you) are so full of anger and despair misdirected at the world around them, they inadvertently become enemies of the very creation they supposedly are trying to defend.

The best way to put it is this; science is a great tool for knowledge. Religion is a great path for those who choose to follow it. But the very reason they must be seperate is that while each idea rose for the same reasons (to answer questions about the world), the paths both have taken are very distinct and different means to solve very different issues. I mean, c'mon -would you eat a chicken leg in order solve a differential calculus problem?

Great minds like Richard Dawkins and Ernst Mayr keep the lights of science burning bright while being very respectful of religion. Hopefully, great relgious leaders will follow suit.

Like I said, here's hoping...

John
 
:shock: :shock: :shock:
Whaaaa...? Is this for real? I just couldn't believe that article. Hilarious! More power to them. I just love the concluding paragraph:

"Startling new underground group spreads lack of panic! Citizens declare themselves "relatively unafraid" of threats of undeclared rationality. People can still go to France, terrorist leader says."


Cheers, Sibling Cutlass of Warm Humanitarianism
 
Fujisawas Sake said:
I mean, c'mon -would you eat a chicken leg in order solve a differential calculus problem?

If the problem required me not to pass out from hunger or die of starvation before coming up with the solution, and a chicken leg was the only nutriment available, then you're damned wrong that I wouldn't.

:razz:
 
This is heartwarmingly funny and a lot less off topic that it seems, says The Claymore of Looking at All Sides of the Question :biggrin2:
 
Tolerance between accidental ape-creatures? Who cares?! Unitarians seem to have a "To whom it may concern" attitude toward religion and the entire notion of deity. If they choose this, so be it. Certainly, it would do an awful lot toward promoting tolerance and understanding among the hairless apes accidentally dominating this planetoid, but really, who cares?

Cthulhu has no use for any of us, save those of us He reaches in dreams, who organise to reach Him the next time His Holy Tower rises, to awaken Him so that He may devour and destroy across the globe, devouring all in His path. Only then can the cephalopods take their rightful place once again as the supreme, true rulers of this world.

:cthulhu:
 
ob said:
This is heartwarmingly funny and a lot less off topic that it seems, says The Claymore of Looking at All Sides of the Question :biggrin2:

I ran across the Jihad while on a forum about Crazy Pat and the Dover elections (sounds like a bad cover band) and thought Ya know, this is what the debate needs--militant moderates to make everyone sit down and have a rational discussiion instead of veiled threats, calls to be quiet, and people taking their balls and going home because they don't like opposing viewpoints.

Show me some evidence of ID and I'll eat me a big heaping plate of crow, but show me the evidence-- don't just say life is too complex and the odds against it are too great for it have happened by chance so it had to have been designed. Longshots happen.

A case in point, a few years back a friend of mine was driving to work, hit an inch deep puddle and skidded off the road into a 5 ft deep ditch and ended up with the front end of her truck under water. She got out and walked across the road to a nearby house to call a tow truck. While she was making the call another car came along, hit the same puddle and slammed into the back of her truck-- pushing it out the other side of the ditch and saving the motor from water damage. The car was totaled, the truck had a small dent on the bumper. Longshots happen.

Evolution kicked me in the teeth about a year and a half ago when my mom came down with methicillin and vancomyicin resistant staph while undergoing chemo and nearly died. If that particular bug was designed then we should have some strong words with the project manager.

Science changes to fit the observed data. No, Darwin didn't get it 100% correct but neither did Newton or Einstein when they worked on gravity. If evidence for ID comes along then biologists will fit it in to evolution and we'll get a new theory including intellegent design. that's what science does.

Ok getting off my soapbox now.
 
I just learned about an interesting part of Deuteronomy:

'No Ammonite may be admitted to the congregation of Yahweh.' --Deuteronomy 23:3
 

Shop Amazon

Shop Amazon
Shop Amazon; support TONMO!
Shop Amazon
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon and affiliated sites.
Back
Top