serai, I’m sorry, your right in that the word religion, doesn’t spell out exactly that of an evolution believing atheist. But you guys put a slight twist on it. This “altered-religion” as I will call it is: people being too prideful in their selves and rejecting belief in a supernatural who gives the rules, then transfers that power to themselves, which you have conveniently done. So now you can decide the rules for yourself instead of the supernatural. ”sigh” which is a whole lot more enjoyable to you.
And instead of worshipping a god, yourself is who you worship.-This falls into the category of pleasures, etc, the “if it feels good do it” mentality. It’s a very selfish lifestyle, because you yourself are the center of it.
Finally we come to the faith part of the altered-religion, This is where evolution comes in, you have to have at least some (i would say a lot, but you would probably disagree) faith in order to believe it.
This description holds true in most ways to the one you gave me, only it’s been severely warped.
So yes I was wrong that its just a plain old religion, but more so a evolution/atheistic “altered-religion”

Les, this is what I was referring to earlier as yourself being the god of your own life.

Also serai, you seem to be quite sure that there are no absolutes. That statement in itself contradicts itself, I thought you’d be smart enough to know that.
At least les realizes that.

No sorry you are incorrect in your assumptions about me. You are forcing me to abuse the power of the little blue boxes now.

But you guys put a slight twist on it. This “altered-religion” as I will call it is: people being too prideful in their selves and rejecting belief in a supernatural who gives the rules, then transfers that power to themselves, which you have conveniently done.

You assume incorrectly that I am an atheist, and also that I reject belief in a greater spirit being, I do not. You assume that because I said that I have chosen my path I am doing it out of pride or self importance.

Let me ask something, did you not choose to be a christian? Did you not make decisions yourself regarding which form of christianity you would follow, and which interpretations of scripture you would subscribe to? Do you think you were ‘prideful’ or ‘selfish’ for doing so?

Just because I choose not to discuss my beliefs with you, it does not mean I do not have any.

And instead of worshipping a god, yourself is who you worship.-This falls into the category of pleasures, etc, the “if it feels good do it” mentality. It’s a very selfish lifestyle, because you yourself are the center of it.

Incorrect again I am afraid, I do not ‘worship’ myself, I said that I simply prefer to rely on my own judgement. After all if we are being tested for suitability by God then why follow a path dictated by others, surely it would be better to stand or fall as the case may be upon our own merits and judgements?

Finally we come to the faith part of the altered-religion, This is where evolution comes in, you have to have at least some (i would say a lot, but you would probably disagree) faith in order to believe it.

I do believe in evolution as a concept, because it does happen, we see it everyday take the common cold virus for instance, it is continually evolving. I did not however say I was a proponent of evolution being the reason we are here today.

Also serai, you seem to be quite sure that there are no absolutes.

Yes from my own personal perspective I don’t believe in absoluteism, what’s your problem with that exactly? I believe that all things are relative to personal perspective, so basically if something is ‘right’ for me I don’t automatically assume it isn’t ‘wrong’ for someone else.

I have to question what your point in challenging my views here is exactly, do you seriously think I will be convinced that I need to become a christian, just because you have sneered at me for not being one?

Also if I were to suddenly see the light as it were, which brand of the way(TM) am I to choose? It’s all so confusing so many different ones all claiming to be the one true path to salvation, and all claiming to be christian, are they really all the the way(TM) despite their obvious and sometimes violent differences?

As I said to that chap selling double glazing the other week, ‘if it’s all the same to you I think I will stick with what I have thank you.’

There are enough people engaging “Dr.” Hovind in debates that my involvement isn’t really necessary. This website is something I can do in my spare time whereas traveling around engaging the likes of Hovind would quickly become a full-time job that other people are definitely better qualified to do than I am.

serai, I’m sorry, your right in that the word religion, doesn’t spell out exactly that of an evolution believing atheist. But you guys put a slight twist on it. This “altered-religion” as I will call it is: people being too prideful in their selves and rejecting belief in a supernatural who gives the rules, then transfers that power to themselves, which you have conveniently done. So now you can decide the rules for yourself instead of the supernatural. “sigh” which is a whole lot more enjoyable to you.

I always love how folks such as yourself describe people who don’t buy into myths and fantasies such as God as being “prideful,” which is just another way of calling us arrogant. Everyone decides the rules for themselves, even believers. Hell, most Christians can’t even agree amongst themselves which rules in the Bible are ironclad and which aren’t. Whether you pick and choose from a predetermined list supposedly written by a supernatural entity or you figure out the rules using reason and intelligence doesn’t change the fact that we all decide for ourselves what is right and wrong and those decisions can change over time. Slavery, once condoned and supported by people and religions is now generally regarded as a “bad thing” by most people and religions.

And instead of worshipping a god, yourself is who you worship.-This falls into the category of pleasures, etc, the “if it feels good do it” mentality. It’s a very selfish lifestyle, because you yourself are the center of it.

I don’t worship myself. I don’t think I’m particularly special or deserving of worship. I also don’t subscribe to the ‘if it feels good, do it’ mentality. If I did I’d be punching a lot more people in the mouth for being such stupid idiots because it would definitely make me feel good. Seeing as I don’t go around punching stupid people in the mouth it’s pretty safe to assume I’m not of the ‘if it feels good’ mentality. My family takes greater precedence in my life than myself so I am not living a self-centered life. These are all assumptions believers like to make about non-believers, but even a casual look will show those assumptions to be wrong more often than not.

The implication being that without God and the threat of eternal punishment then all people would resort to completely selfish and anything goes lifestyles is not borne out by reality. For some people it may be true, but not for everyone. I’ve known plenty of believers who were more self-centered and prideful than any non-believer I can think of. That’s not hard, though, as there tend to be more believers than non-believers out there.

Finally we come to the faith part of the altered-religion, This is where evolution comes in, you have to have at least some (i would say a lot, but you would probably disagree) faith in order to believe it.

Faith is only necessary in the absence of knowledge. If one doesn’t study up on Evolution or any of the fields of science it has spawned and is largely ignorant of what it entails then, yes, it would take a lot of faith to accept it. If one actually studies up on Evolution and how it has developed and changed over time then there is little need for faith. There are whole fields of science that have developed off of the foundations of Evolution.

This description holds true in most ways to the one you gave me, only it’s been severely warped.
So yes I was wrong that its just a plain old religion, but more so a evolution/atheistic “altered-religion”

I see now that you’re confusing “faith” as being synonymous with “religion,” which clearly isn’t so. I have faith that when I flip the light switch in my bedroom the light will come on as it almost always does, but I don’t have a “religion of light switches” as a result. Religions involve rules, tenets, rituals and so on. None of which is involved in being an atheist and accepting Evolution as a valid scientific theory.

Les, this is what I was referring to earlier as yourself being the god of your own life.

Which makes no sense at all. It implies that all people look for something “God-like” in their lives and if they don’t accept a super-natural explanation then they substitute themselves.

les, I never once said devote your life to debating hovind and make it a full time job, I said just do it once. Set up a time with him and do it once, it’ll take no more than one day. I find it hard to believe you wouldn’t offer one day to support your cause, but spend countless hours responding to petty people like myself.
If you think that there is enough people debating him already, your plainly wrong, he asks hundreds of profs all the time and all but a small few cower off. And the ones that do debate, get destroyed! helplessly destroyed.
Don’t give excuses like your last please.

also when you said this “It implies that all people look for something “God-like” in their lives and if they don’t accept a super-natural explanation then they substitute themselves.”
almost true, only I should have said the substitute something instead such as family, sports, money, watching american idol....etc.  but for some, theirself is the substitute.

Hmmmm serai, here’s what I got when I looked religion up.1 a : the state of a religious b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
2 : a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
3 archaic : scrupulous conformity : CONSCIENTIOUSNESS
4 : a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

taking a look at the bottom 3 meanings, if not at least the 2, I’d say maybe I don’t have to battle this argument as much as I have.
and les, don’t give me your “It doesnt require any faith what so ever!” we see it today in nothing but micro-evolution, which IS happening today i agree, but there is no macro-evolution happening today, and don’t make time your hero here les.
So until your virus turns into a frog or a banana of whatever you think it’s turning into, then stop claiming that micro-evolution if proof for macro, ITS NOT.

I can see now that you have no intent toward having a serious discussion as you consistently ignore many of the points I raise to spew out the same tired old arguments we’ve been through before on this site including the argument that there isn’t any evidence supporting macro evolution when, in fact, there is. We’ve been there and done that. On top of that your inability to compose a semi-coherent sentence is taxing my patience. Go take some typing lessons and perhaps a remedial English class or two and try to develop some new arguments we’ve not heard a hundred times before and then come back and try to engage us with your witty banter and deep philosophical insights.

So far you’re just another in a long line of broken records and if the folks who came before you weren’t successful at convincing us with their arguments then simply restating the same things they used isn’t going to work for you either.

Forgive me if I bow out now, I am afraid it’s becoming pointless. You have nothing new to offer, and you continually miss the point of what I try to say.

Fact of the matter is personally I will never accept christianity. I am happy enough with what I believe, and I am not out to win any arguments, because I know I am the best person to judge what is right for me, and I don’t care to judge what is right for anyone else.

As I have always said it’s an insecure believer that strengthens his own beliefs by attacking other peoples.

Dr. B,

You seem to be of the kind that cannot grasp the concept of evolution, so you assume it isn’t valid. There is ample evidence of macro evolution, but if all you read is what creationist write, you will ensure your continued ignorance on the subject.

Dr. B,
I am a true doctor, MD and all.  To be more precise, I am an anesthesiologist.  You disgrace my profession with your rag-tag use of the English language and faulty illogical arguments.  Just a few questions for you, Dr. B:  How did you graduate from Medical School?  What state issued you a license to practice?  To be completely honest, I am embarrassed to be associated with a physician such as you.  Why do you feel the need to push your beliefs onto others?  It is assinine and pathetic.  There are imbeciles and morons in my profession, and I think you are the king of them all.  Jesus be damned!  I will eat your children and spit out their remains on your grave.  God bless you all, except for Les.  Join me in hell!
Jesse VB, MD

I hate to be one more to gang up on poor old Doc B, but I had to bow out once I saw how little he wanted to expand the barriers to his perception. I’m amazed the rest of you put so much effort into attempting to communicate politely. Dr. B you started the string full of anger and resentment. As it progressed, you continued to argue from an apparent perceived position of personal moral rightness and intellectual superiority. Have you met David? Perhaps the two of you would get along. Here’s hoping you can someday see past the fog obstructing your world view. No one should be that unaware.

Ok, guys, haha I can’t be bothered any more, I’ve got enough people’s attention. hey Jesse, you got me, I do have bad sentence structure, and my spelling is nothing great either.
And brock, your also right, I did start the strand with anger, and people dismissed it as “troll” work. Which it was, but I wanted to see if I could hold up for a while, and see how right these guys thought they were. so when asked earlier if I was a doc I created sort of a 1/2 way answer that left it a possibilty but nothing more.
I must say, they do know alot more than me, especially les, he has done a lot more research than me,
this is mainly because I’m 17 years old,
you might have have brushed me off if you knew.
I’m no doctor, so jesse you can just take it easy over there. once people read this it’ll be allll better, and you can stop freaking out.
no, Dr. B is just a nickname.
yes Brock, I too am amazed at how much attention that they’ve shown me, considering les is 36, I don’t know the age of the others but still, they’re not juniors. But here we are 36 messages later.
All i’ve tried to do is argue my points to the best of my ability, given my wisdom verses theirs, (theirs is way more) I’d say I did an alright job, considering im still in high school.
So les, who knows, maybe I’ll “wake up” one day like you did and realize there is no God, or maybe i’ll stay “blinded” the rest of my life. I’ll i know is that I’ve given my life to God, and a perfect being can tell me what to do any day, I trust him more than my sinful self to decide whats right and wrong.
Well it’s been fun anyways, and I certainly learned a great deal.
Thanks guys, especially les,
hey les, you can add me to your long line of unsuccessfull prayer dudes.

I’ll still be around to learn more and talk, but I wouldn’t imagine you’d want to talk to me anymore.  should I change my name? or do you guys care?

Dr B, or “just some guy B”, I hope you don’t think you came across as much older than 17. There’s hope for you creating an independent mind set yet. Just keep in mind that life is full of mysteries and if there is a god, he won’t hold any grudges if we are decent but dumb. Not if he’s a god worth following.
No hard feelings I hope. I do wish you the best and think it’s great that you want to talk. That’s the first step to any meaningful involvement. Peace out.
Oh, you might consider changing your name though, simply because the one you used seems so pretentious and tainted. Just a thought.

For the record I would never brush you off simply because you are 17 years old. I was 17 once myself and a different person back then. I suspected you were in high school based on how you wrote and the content of your messages. I am willing to discuss these issues with anyone who comes along regardless of age if they are interested in a serious discussion.

Whether you wake up some day and take the blinders off, as you put it, is not as important to me as just getting you to think a little more about what you believe and why you believe it. I’m not trying to convert anyone to atheism, but I am trying to get more folks to think a little more than they do. You don’t have to resort to subterfuge to participate here.

I can only second what Les said, I am happy to debate or discuss things with people, providing they are civil. Also I agree it’s not about ‘converting’ people to what we believe rather getting people to think about what they believe, it was thinking about my beliefs that caused me to change my views on a lot of things in life, and I am very glad that I did.

Dr. B.:

Keep the faith ...

Hey guys,
My real name is Drew Baker, hence “Dr. B”
but I will now just go by DB, to keep the peace between me and the real docs.
Thanks IB Bill, for one of the only pieces of encouragement I’ve heard here.

Hey les, that link that you posted on the hovind argument about “29 bits of evidence..”
always errors when I click it, but I want very much to read them. Is there any way you can post it again? or at least just give me the website?
Thanks

DB, it’s unfortunate that you chose to recognize only IB Bill’s remark as one of encouragement. It seems to me that several people, including myself, welcomed you and wished you no ill. We wanted you to feel welcome to discuss whatever you felt important in as positive and effective a way as you could. But the only thing you saw as encouraging was a brief and vacuous remark of “Keep the faith....” Odd....and disapointing. Maybe you only want to believe we are non- supportive. Maybe you only feel comfortable with the blinders on. Anyway, nice to talk to you Drew...sincerely.

Brock, I’m sorry, I should have said that bill’s comment was one that encouraged me personally in my faith, you unfortunatly can’t say what has or hasn’t encouraged me. Yes I have been encouraged to research and to become a better speller by you and the others, and thats all great too, but I hope you see now what I meant.
Thank you for pointing out that I DO have blinders on.

Vacuous?

Lapidary, maybe, but not vacuous, Brock.

Keep the faith, DB.  You don’t need blinders on to walk with God.  In fact, blinders are required to shut out knowledge of God.  Men hate the light because their deeds are evil, as the Good Book says. The knowledge of God is written on every human heart. 

Or in the words of Oliver Wendell Jones of Bloom County fame, “The world is just too damned orderly to be a big (&()%^& accident.”

Language, music, beauty, dance, mathematics ... all these point not to accidental clumps of matter forming amino acids and eventually consciousness, but hint at something greater—a designer, a great engineer, an intelligence. 

Any specific religion is a tough argument to make.  But theism, or at least agnosticism, is fairly easy.  Atheism is an act of faith. 

At 17 you may hear a lot about educated people turning away from God.  Don’t necessarily believe it.  Many of the most brilliant people ever, from Socrates to Thomas Jefferson to Albert Einstein, believed in God. Don’t worry. God exists and He’s legit. His nature may be knowable or unknowable, we’re not sure.  But the truth is out there.

Oooo. Lapidary, indeed. I wonder how many people were sent scurrying to their dictionaries over that one.

Keep the faith, DB. You don’t need blinders on to walk with God. In fact, blinders are required to shut out knowledge of God. Men hate the light because their deeds are evil, as the Good Book says. The knowledge of God is written on every human heart.

I always love how believers insist that everyone, deep down, knows that God exists. It’s the perfect statement as any argument against it can be painted as simple denial. I could just as easily claim that, deep down, all believers know that God doesn’t exist and are just too weak-minded to deal with the idea of an uncaring universe so they engage in wishful thinking.

Or in the words of Oliver Wendell Jones of Bloom County fame, “The world is just too damned orderly to be a big (&()%^& accident.”

The irony of citing that particular strip is the fact that OWJ was an atheist and was engaging in an annual ritual of doubt. I’d be willing to say that most atheists question their views from time to time. OWJ owned up to surface appearances, but he wasn’t caving in to suddenly becoming a believer.

Language, music, beauty, dance, mathematics … all these point not to accidental clumps of matter forming amino acids and eventually consciousness, but hint at something greater - a designer, a great engineer, an intelligence.

I also love how believers like to try and lay claim to all the good things in the world as being the result of a creator while ignoring all the bad such a being brings out in the world at the same time. I’ve always taken statements like the one above being borne more out of ignorance than anything else. Mankind has a history of ascribing supernatural explanations to anything it hasn’t understood.

Any specific religion is a tough argument to make. But theism, or at least agnosticism, is fairly easy. Atheism is an act of faith.

Correction: atheism is a lack of faith. Once again we’re confronted with the suggestion that agnostics are somehow better off than atheists. Agnosticism is just a weak form of atheism. An agnostic’s basic viewpoint is “given the evidence I am unable to decide whether or not there is a God so I won’t make a decision one way or the other” whereas an atheist says “given the evidence I have no good reason to believe God exists.” Agnostics are just wishy-washy or, at best, being diplomatic.

At 17 you may hear a lot about educated people turning away from God. Don’t necessarily believe it. Many of the most brilliant people ever, from Socrates to Thomas Jefferson to Albert Einstein, believed in God. Don’t worry. God exists and He’s legit. His nature may be knowable or unknowable, we’re not sure. But the truth is out there.

I think you’ll find that the Gods Socrates believed in are a far cry from the God most Christians believe in having been put to death long before the rise of Christianity. Of course, many people consider Socrates to be the quintessential skeptical Humanist. As for Thomas Jefferson, he was a Deist much like most of the Founding Fathers and while he had great respect for Jesus as a philosopher, he rejected the idea of Jesus as the literal Son of God and wasn’t overly fond of Christianity as a religion. Einstein was at best a Deist though a good argument could be made that he was an atheist who laid claim to Deism for diplomatic purposes. All three of these men would be condemned to Hell based on the Christian rules.

Not that it makes any difference. Intelligent people of all sorts have believed in Gods of various religions over the years just as lots of stupid people have managed to reject the concept of Gods. There are intelligent and well educated men who also believe in alien abductions, the Loch Ness Monster, ghosts, leprechauns, ESP, aroma therapy and countless other silly things. Your statement above is just a variation on the Argumentum ad verecundiam or the Appeal to Authority. Just because highly intelligent people may happen to believe something exists doesn’t prove anything other than highly intelligent people can believe it exists.

I could believe that sentient flying purple platypuses exist someplace in the Universe and I could even imagine what the nature of such a beast might be, but that doesn’t mean they do exist or that anyone else should buy into my belief without good reason to. Even if I manage to convince several million people of the reality of the existence of these critters doesn’t mean they do exist or are anything like I describe them to be.

Oooo. Lapidary, indeed. I wonder how many people were sent scurrying to their dictionaries over that one.

C’mon, Les, was it the right word or not? 

I could just as easily claim that, deep down, all believers know that God doesn’t exist and are just too weak-minded to deal with the idea of an uncaring universe so they engage in wishful thinking.

Wishful thinking? Weak-minded?  I would take an uncaring, indifferent universe to Last Judgment any day.  If I thought this was all there is, I’d have me a time [which I’ve already had, actually], and then check out when I was too old to enjoy my life [probably in about 30 years]. 

There’s no wishful thinking in coming before God and having to explain myself.  No, that’s terrifying.  My point isn’t that you’re wrong, Les.  My point is that your argument cuts both ways.

Living for a little while on a warm rock in an empty universe does not worry me in the least.  I could easily come to philosophical terms with that.  Coming to terms with God’s judgment is a little more difficult.

I also love how believers like to try and lay claim to all the good things in the world as being the result of a creator while ignoring all the bad such a being brings out in the world at the same time.

I said “hints”, not conclusively proves. It’s evidence, used for induction.  It seems to me that the universe is too orderly and contains too many extra features to just be a big ole accident. YMMV. 

The things I cited seemed to be unnecessary extras.  Some form of communication is probably necessary for survival—but poetry?  I dunno.  Why a sense of beauty? A sense of awe?  Survival mechanisms--really?  Music?  It seems to me these things go beyond mere survival necessity or would be the product of an accidental world. But again, these things hint at something greater ... they are evidence of another intelligence beyond our own, but not proof.

You also bring up the problem of evil.  It’s a mystery.  God says trust Him on this one.  So we skip over it.  Next question.

Your statement above is just a variation on the Argumentum ad verecundiam or the Appeal to Authority.

I wasn’t clear.  My statement was written to DB, lest he think that education will automatically disabuse him of the notion of God. 

I’m not saying God exists because Jefferson or Einstein says so, and I agree with you that this would be a logical fallacy.  I also agree with you that these are very different God concepts.

What I was telling DB was that don’t think because you’re 17 you’ll have to give up God when “you’re older and better educated.” Probably wasn’t clear.

And I don’t know who’s in Hell and who’s not. Probably just former evangelicals who lost the faith

If “keep the faith” can be construed as concise, precise, and refined then I’m thinking “trolls” are getting a bad rap on this site and elsewhere. “Drinks and driving don’t mix!” - now that’s concise, precise and refined! What you said was vacuous. Keep the faith in what? How do you know exactly what his faith entails? Should he keep his consciousness? His particular sense of self? Or should he safeguard “THE FAITH” and dispense it to others on a need to know basis only? Did he get “THE FAITH” from you and now you wish him to keep it for himself, not to share or trade it with anyone?

I have another directive which is just as meaningful...."Carry on my wayward son!”

Take it easy Brock, it’s a word.
I’m sure he’s glad you’ve slammed him into the ground for using it. You’ve really made yourself look alot smarter for doing so.

Hello all,

Well, where do I start? I just came on this site, and there are so many messages to comment on. Firstly I would like to respond to Serai.  I must tell you all right away, that I, myself, am a follower of Christ and have committed my life to him.  Ok, Serai, you made some comments earier, on September 28 to be exact, about Christianity, and your views on the world.  There are a few questions that I must ask, along with some comments I wish to make regarding your post.  Firstly, if I may ask; are you a believer in absolute truth, or are you a believer in relativity? Would you agree that in this world there are some things that are undisputabley true? Obviously, there are laws which pertain to our universe that, as a whole, people believe to be true.  For example, I would be willing to gamble, that at least 99% of educated people in this world would say that the law of gravity is an absolute truth.  The few who choose to believe that the absolute truth of gravity does not apply to them, can easily impress me by dropping off of a skyscaper, free of any safety device and land safely on the ground.  I trust that you understand my point; that there are absolutes in this world.  Obviously there are ways to get around them, for instance, with regards to gravity, you can escape the natural work of gravity by using a parachute, or bungge cord etc.  I will move forward by making the following statement, that everyone in this world is a moral being.  Everyone has some sort of believe system by which they choose to live their life.  Even if one would claim to believe (which I believe is impossible), that there is no right or wrong way to live your life; the very fact that they say that shows, to me at least, that they do in fact believe in right and wrong. In other words, their impartiality to morals is their morally correct way of life. So, the bottom line is that everyone is a moral being. Where the controversy comes, and where I bring back the first part of this post, is when you ask the question, is there absolute right and wrong? We have established absolute truth in things such as gravity, or the laws of conservation of mass and energy etc.  You, Serai, have stated that if you end up facing a god (and I believe you will, the one true God of the bible), you will tell him that you did what you thought was right.  I see that kind of reasoning as very illogical, and to be quit frank, a copp out.  If morality is relative, and there is no absolute truth, then the sentence I just typed is irrelevant. Anything you believe is irrelevant!  If everything regarding morality is subjective to every human, then who desides the conduct that we should uphold in our society?  That means that how live our lives, is in the hands of other humans. Look in history at what happens when that power falls into the wrong human hands; Hitler, is a typical, but amazing example, of how the theory of relative truth is rediculous.  He believed what he did was right, and carried out some of the most heinous group of events recorded in history.  If there is a perfect being (Jehova God)to distinguish what is right and wrong for His creation, does that not make more logical sense, than us deciding for ourselves?