Christian Schools Bring Suit Against UC

[Hakan]

The Flying Spaghetti Monster has mysterious ways...

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally posted by Cheese@Aug 31 2005, 01:26 PM
Creationists believe Mr Rouge that this earth can only be 6-10,000 years old so anything science does to disprove this is categorically ignored.

Yeah I guess, but it would be mighty hard to ignore, wouldn't it?

If I was living under a constant barrage of information that directly contradicted, if not outright mocked my core belief system, I think I'd go crazy.

Look at it another way -- if all the mainstream media was promoting creationism constantly, the leading scientific minds were saying that the earth was say 14000 years old, your kids were being taught this in school, the government funded (with your money) research to promote this idea, but you still believe in evolution... how could you deal with that? I don't think I could, but creationists put up with it everyday. It's gotta be hard.

[Frank the Tank]

Originally posted by peter12@Aug 31 2005, 02:28 PM

If you want to bring up scientific arguments... strong scientific evidence points to life not being a mere freakish coincidence.

Really? So it points to god snapping his fingers and such?

[Bobblehead]

One thing that drives me nuts is people say, "But it is only a theory."

It is a Scientific Theory.

From the Wikipedia:

In common usage a theory is often viewed as little more than a guess or a hypothesis. But in science and generally in academic usage, a theory is much more than that. A theory is an established paradigm that explains all or much of the data we have and offers valid predictions that can be tested. In science, a theory is never concidered fact or unfallible, because we can never assume we know all there is to know. Instead, theories remain standing until they are disproven, at which point they are thrown out altogether or modified to fit the additional data.

[Cheese]

Originally posted by peter12+Aug 31 2005, 03:35 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (peter12 @ Aug 31 2005, 03:35 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Oh please enlighten us Peter...Im game for a challenge!

Not in the case of there being clear evidence of an intelligent being creating human life on this planet.
But there is evidence of life occuring anywhere the right conditions are present. Certain molecules exposed to light in certain elements at a certain temperature most likely will start a chain of evolution.

If it can occur anywhere it does point to something different than just a random coincidence. [/b][/quote]
Im a little slow Peter...but arent you just suggesting to us what Cow has mentioned 3 or 4 times? Let me guess...you are a closet Evolutionist arent you?

[FireFly]

Originally posted by Cheese+Aug 31 2005, 12:51 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Cheese @ Aug 31 2005, 12:51 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-FireFly@Aug 31 2005, 02:29 PM
I'm a Christian, and I believe in both. I don't believe in the big bang theory, and I have my own 'explaination' for why the world looks the way it does, without it taking 60 Billion years to make it look that way. (Or however long evolutionists say it took to make the earth look that way.)

A literal interpretation of the Bible is going overboard. There are some things that 'should' be taken literally by those who believe in it, and others, like the story of creation, should be taken as rough approximations.

If you want to get technical, a creationist 'should' believe that the Earth is about 14000 years old. 7000 years for creation, (one per 'day' in the Bible,) and 7000 years for destruction, which we should be nearing the Revelation shortly.

Here's a question for you all who don't believe:

Should the events depicted in the Book of Revelation actually occur, would you then believe?

so what you are saying Firefly is that as a Christian you only have to believe in "parts" of the bible?
You get to pick and choose which verses to read literally and dismiss the rest as allegory or metaphor, without any consistent system for deciding between the two?
That makes sense why Christians are so easily led then doesnt it? IF only pieces of your supposed bible need to be adhered too...and dependant on who interprets them?
If some verses are to be taken literally...and some poetically?<sic> or metaphorically, is that not hypocritical? [/b][/quote]
There are parts that need to be taken literally, such as the 10 Commandments, and other parts that need to be read within context. Even the Bible itself has contradictions... An eye for an eye vs. love the sinner and not the sin would be a fine example of such a contradiction. Which do we believe? Just because some things cannot be taken literally, that doesn't mean we should throw out the whole work. I believe in Christ's teachings. That's the basis of being a Christian. Christ didn't say anything about creation, he spoke about love. I could throw out the whole of the Old Testament, and still be a Christian, as those are Jewish teachings. However, that would leave a hole in my learnings, as the Jews are an important part of Gods plan. I should know about them and their teachings, to understand better what Jesus taught. That doesn't mean I should burn animals, or poke somebody's eye out though.

Christians have evolved in their beliefs over 2 millenia, why are they not allowed to today? As we learn more, we also evolve in our beliefs, Cow. That's the reason there is an Old and New Testament. That's an evolution as well. Why is that one acceptable, and not any others?

For the person who asked if I'd still believe in God without the Revelation, I won't know one way or the other, will I? If I don't see the Revelation, that doesn't mean it won't happen after I'm gone.


The biggest difference between the two theories is that those who believe in Creation, don't need proof. It's faith. Those who believe in evolution, need proof. While limited proof exists, scientist still cannot prove that Earth itself evolved. There is no proof of the big bang theory, or the evolution of chemicals on earth into life. As a matter of fact, after just taking a 'History of Life' course at the University, I can say that the I'm relatively certain it's almost impossible to create life out of nothing. The requirements for the creation of amino acids out of random chemicals are such that the development of said amino acids never turn into life. IE: for animo acids to develop, there can be no oxygen present. Without oxygen present, there is no life.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally posted by 89revival@Aug 31 2005, 01:14 PM
I too am a Christian and am firmly against "The Big Bang" theory...I do however believe that things evolve and that God plays a part in evolution......if you've ever read the bible or studied its contents then you'd know mankind thinking they know it all is discussed. Talks of man becoming over confident in him/herself and being able to succeed in life minus God. It talks particularily about having the mindset of "i'm a good person, i lead a good life" and that "that should be enough".

Evolution may offer some piece of mind for the time being but not much beyond that...........belief in God and faith in his existence offers far, far more.....personally I like to think that there is a bigger reason for me being here other then because the old chemicals aligned 900 billion cagillion trimillion light years ago.

Just doesn't do it for me, i find it easier to humble myself and trust that this huge mass of earth was put here in a perfect setting to allow life to exist and progress by someone/thing far larger than us.

Look how complex the human body is, the human mind, reproduction.......you can't see the air you breathe but you trust that it is there don't you?

Prove that it's there.

Prove the air is there.
Okay,
It has mass.
If that isn't enough, go underwater and exhale. Where do you think those bubbles are comming from?

That's the dumbest analogy I've ever heard of.

[Savvy27]

I find it kind of entertaining that people still question whether the earth is billions of years old.

But, I do want to make one comment in relation to what Cheese was saying. Although I agree with you that Christians often disregard parts of the bible for the sake of convenience, they truly cannot take literally everything written in it. It has been shown by researchers who have studied the bible that throughout the many years it has been around, there have been things added. There will be passages that will go completely off topic to include a "rule" or something similar that has no bearing on the rest of the passage so it is assumed that this was not put in by the original author.

Anyways, back to the age of the earth. I have to go with Cow on this one. The theory of evolution is not on par evidence (or logic IMO) wise with creationism. It is not even close. DELETED because this has been explained much better by people above me.

When you really look at it, if Christianity hadn't caught on, people would be calling anyone who considered a book that had been written by people who were supposedly inspired by angels, crackpots. An all powerful, yet invisible, father figure created the universe in six days then chilled out on the seventh.

One question I have for believers would have to be: Don't you find it a little worrying that God would create dinosaurs only to choose he didn't like them anymore and destroy them?

OH! and to actually comment on the original topic, I think its totally absurd for people to believe in creationism, but, if they also learned the theory of evolution then I think its unfair to keep them from attending the university. I doubt the students truly wanted to be taught creationism and I would think that spending time at an institution where science is taught based on fact instead 'faith' would only help these students.

[peter12]

Originally posted by Cheese@Aug 31 2005, 01:43 PM

Im a little slow Peter...but arent you just suggesting to us what Cow has mentioned 3 or 4 times? Let me guess...you are a closet Evolutionist arent you?

Do you have problems with ya head?

I have said at least twice that I believe in evolution but that I also believe in God. I have also said that I reject the standard "World appears in 7 days... literally!" stuff.

So no... I'm not a closet evolutionist. I fully admit I can accept 90% of the theory in accordance with my own religious beliefs.

What I have some problem with is the way you and Frank are arrogantly mocking Christians in this thread while so confidently believing in your own brand of how the world got started



MOD edit: Lets keep the size of the quotes down please..

[89revival]

I'm dumb then, sorry about that.

[Cheese]

Originally posted by RougeUnderoos+Aug 31 2005, 03:41 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (RougeUnderoos @ Aug 31 2005, 03:41 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Cheese@Aug 31 2005, 01:26 PM
Creationists believe Mr Rouge that this earth can only be 6-10,000 years old so anything science does to disprove this is categorically ignored.

Yeah I guess, but it would be mighty hard to ignore, wouldn't it?

If I was living under a constant barrage of information that directly contradicted, if not outright mocked my core belief system, I think I'd go crazy.

Look at it another way -- if all the mainstream media was promoting creationism constantly, the leading scientific minds were saying that the earth was say 14000 years old, your kids were being taught this in school, the government funded (with your money) research to promote this idea, but you still believe in evolution... how could you deal with that? I don't think I could, but creationists put up with it everyday. It's gotta be hard. [/b][/quote]
ya tuff...but really think about what they are teaching their kids Rouge. Heaven and Hell. A belief in Supernatural events. Yet when they watch Casper cartoons they tell their kids its all fiction? No wonder they are confused!

They accept science when it conforms to their preconceptions and reject it when it does not.

[Frank the Tank]

Originally posted by peter12@Aug 31 2005, 02:48 PM
What I have some problem with is the way you and Frank are arrogantly mocking Christians in this thread while so confidently believing in your own brand of how the world got started.

How am I mocking Christians? Oh wait. I am.

Sorry Peter. I should know better than to get into religious threads. I honestly mean no offense, I just hate religion. I have no problem with people who have faith or beleive in a higher power, it just ticks me off when they sue a school for not accepting their teachings.

[Hakan]

This thread is beginning to look like a thread off forum.canucks.com with all the unnecessary quoting.

[Frank the Tank]

Originally posted by 89revival@Aug 31 2005, 02:49 PM
I'm dumb then, sorry about that.

Dumb is pretty harsh. I'd say you are very passionate about your set of beliefs, as am I.

[Hakan]

Originally posted by 89revival@Aug 31 2005, 12:49 PM
I'm dumb then, sorry about that.

Don't need to be sorry. Just need to stop being dumb and synthesize arguments outside of your preferred dogma.

As a first step I recommend the second and third chapters of J.S. Mill's 'On Liberty'.

That'll get you well on the way.

[peter12]

Originally posted by Frank the Tank+Aug 31 2005, 01:52 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Frank the Tank @ Aug 31 2005, 01:52 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-peter12@Aug 31 2005, 02:48 PM
What I have some problem with is the way you and Frank are arrogantly mocking Christians in this thread while so confidently believing in your own brand of how the world got started.

How am I mocking Christians? Oh wait. I am.

Sorry Peter. I should know better than to get into religious threads. I honestly mean no offense, I just hate religion. I have no problem with people who have faith or beleive in a higher power, it just ticks me off when they sue a school for not accepting their teachings. [/b][/quote]
The problem is Frank is the generalization that all Christians are the same as these irrelevant jackasses in California or the flaming nutcases in the deep south U.S. of A.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally posted by Frank the Tank+Aug 31 2005, 01:53 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Frank the Tank @ Aug 31 2005, 01:53 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-89revival@Aug 31 2005, 02:49 PM
I'm dumb then, sorry about that.

Dumb is pretty harsh. I'd say you are very passionate about your set of beliefs, as am I. [/b][/quote]
I think he was refering to when I said his "Prove air exists" analogy was the dumbest analogy I've ever seen.

I stand by that statement, but That doesn't mean I think 89 is dumb.
Although if he actually things
Prove God exists and Prove air exists are comparable tasks then I may have to rethink a few things.

[peter12]

It has been shown by researchers who have studied the bible that throughout the many years it has been around, there have been things added. There will be passages that will go completely off topic to include a "rule" or something similar that has no bearing on the rest of the passage so it is assumed that this was not put in by the original author.

Whoa. Pretty sure you are going to have to provide a link to some academic journals to prove that little tidbit.

[Hakan]

Reading it yourself doesn't prove it? Read Leviticus in the old testament and tell me that is the word of God with a straight face.

[Frank the Tank]

Originally posted by peter12+Aug 31 2005, 02:57 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (peter12 @ Aug 31 2005, 02:57 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

How am I mocking Christians? Oh wait. I am.

Sorry Peter. I should know better than to get into religious threads. I honestly mean no offense, I just hate religion. I have no problem with people who have faith or beleive in a higher power, it just ticks me off when they sue a school for not accepting their teachings.

The problem is Frank is the generalization that all Christians are the same as these irrelevant jackasses in California or the flaming nutcases in the deep south U.S. of A. [/b][/quote]
This is true Peter, but like anything, it only takes a few to ruin it for everyone.