This is an archived, read-only copy of the United-TI subforum , including posts and topic from May 2003 to April 2012. If you would like to discuss any of the topics in this forum, you can visit Cemetech's
General Open Topic subforum. Some of these topics may also be directly-linked to active Cemetech topics. If you are a Cemetech member with a linked United-TI account, you can link United-TI topics here with your current Cemetech topics.
Open Topic & United-TI Talk =>
General Open Topic
| Author |
Message |
|
DigiTan
Unregistered HyperCam 2
Super Elite (Last Title)
Joined: 10 Nov 2003
Posts: 4468
|
 Posted: 14 Dec 2008 03:13:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
elfprince13 wrote: I've heard recently that even the old testament, as we know it, wasn't assembled into a single document until more recently than that, though still before the New Testament was compiled. Your history of the individual texts is spot on, but I think it would be fair to say the Bible itself, as a single book is much more recent.
I gotta agree with that. I think that's why the Hebrew priests had such a hard time canonizing this and that, and still produced some awkward translations.
My overall reaction was to the "some fictitious book" remark. The Bible recounts actual historic events, but I'll admit there's no scientific basis for miracles like water into wine, resurrection, or the afterlife, etc. It is a faith after all. That's why I cut the atheists a lot of slack. But if someone's gonna take what a lot of people believe in and call it fiction, at least do it with some sensibility. No F'ing respect these days.
Last edited by Guest on 14 Dec 2008 03:16:58 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ticalcnoah
Member
Joined: 28 Oct 2007
Posts: 153
|
| Posted: 14 Dec 2008 03:24:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ok well that came out quite badly I was more referring to the fact that the bible can be interpreted differently for different people. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GloryMXE7
Puzzleman 3000
Active Member
Joined: 02 Nov 2008
Posts: 604
|
| Posted: 14 Dec 2008 03:58:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| i dont see how your previos statement suggests that |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AlienCC
Creative Receptacle!
Know-It-All
Joined: 24 May 2003
Posts: 1927
|
| Posted: 14 Dec 2008 04:05:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
DigiTan wrote: It is a faith after all. That's why I cut the atheists a lot of slack. But if someone's gonna take what a lot of people believe in and call it fiction, at least do it with some sensibility. No F'ing respect these days.[post="130344"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]
Yeah, if those who classify themselves as atheists expect people in faith based religions to respect their lack of religion, then they had better respect those that choose to believe in something more as well. It's a double standard otherwise, which permeates the stench of hypocrisy.
A little respect goes along way, give a little to get a little. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DarkerLine
ceci n'est pas une |
Super Elite (Last Title)
Joined: 04 Nov 2003
Posts: 8328
|
| Posted: 14 Dec 2008 04:31:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
AlienCC wrote: DigiTan wrote: It is a faith after all. That's why I cut the atheists a lot of slack. But if someone's gonna take what a lot of people believe in and call it fiction, at least do it with some sensibility. No F'ing respect these days.[post="130344"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]
Yeah, if those who classify themselves as atheists expect people in faith based religions to respect their lack of religion, then they had better respect those that choose to believe in something more as well. It's a double standard otherwise, which permeates the stench of hypocrisy.
A little respect goes along way, give a little to get a little.
[post="130348"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]
Also, I believe it makes more sense for stenches of hypocrisy to permeate double standards, rather than vice versa.
Last edited by Guest on 14 Dec 2008 04:31:55 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GloryMXE7
Puzzleman 3000
Active Member
Joined: 02 Nov 2008
Posts: 604
|
| Posted: 14 Dec 2008 04:44:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| well science is a factor in why some people are athiesist |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AlienCC
Creative Receptacle!
Know-It-All
Joined: 24 May 2003
Posts: 1927
|
| Posted: 14 Dec 2008 05:45:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
GloryMXE7 wrote: well science is a factor in why some people are athiesist[post="130352"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]
Science doesn't have to be the reason one chooses to follow atheism. There are many who follow faith based religion and look at science as a means to explain how things around them work, while still believing in something greater than themselves. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
elfprince13
Retired
Super Elite (Last Title)
Joined: 11 Apr 2005
Posts: 3500
|
| Posted: 14 Dec 2008 06:56:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
DarkerLine wrote: I agree that militant atheists can be just as obnoxious as militant believers. I like to convince myself that both are the exception, rather than the norm. But I do think that the reason more moderate atheists tend to snap and make snarky comments about "some ficticious book" is not because some other people choose to believe in it, but because of the growing tendency to treat it as more of a universal law book than, well, actual law books. (The snapping happens more often on the internet, because many people use it to rant)
As true as it is that certain portions of the Christian community push for biblical beliefs to become law on no other grounds than the Bible itself, it seems to me that on a national (and global) scale the tendency to use the Bible as a universal law book is actually in recession.
GloryMXE7 wrote: well science is a factor in why some people are athiest
oddly enough most of the best scientists I know are NOT atheists. This is true historically as well--Galileo and Newton were driven in their scientific pursuits by their faith. Even Einstein to some extent was led to belief in a god (though not the personal God of Abrahamic faiths). When you believe in a God that created the universe you tend to see science as a way to learn more about God. If science reveals something unexpected, and the results hold up to investigation its time to reevaluate your understanding of God. And likewise, scientific discoveries of phenomenon like wave-particle duality can serve to confirm longstanding beliefs in seeming paradoxes, such as a man who is both fully human and fully God.
Sadly I know a lot of Christians who DON'T have an understanding of science, and this leads them to reject its findings rather than use it to hone their faith. Likewise I've heard supposed scientists--intelligent, Ph.D holding, men with professorships at one of the best colleges in the country--acknowledge that they'd sooner believe in little green men on mars than God, no matter what evidence they were shown. This sort of dogmatic atheism leading to groundless rejection of evidence is every bit as much in violation of the spirit of scientific discovery as Christians who reject scientific discoveries based on a mistranslation of a single chapter of the Bible.
Last edited by Guest on 14 Dec 2008 06:57:04 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Register to Join the Conversation
Have your own thoughts to add to this or any other topic? Want to ask a question, offer a suggestion, share your own programs and projects, upload a file to the file archives, get help with calculator and computer programming, or simply chat with like-minded coders and tech and calculator enthusiasts via the site-wide AJAX SAX widget? Registration for a free Cemetech account only takes a minute.
»
Go to Registration page
