OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 30, 2014, 07:19:18 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Four in 10 Americans Believe in Strict Creationism  (Read 3016 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #45 on: December 22, 2010, 12:21:13 AM »


Only "in Western 17th century philosophy." Before that, and aside from that, they are "one and the same discipline." I posted the link simply to introduce this history to those who were unaware of it.

I don't know that that is entirely true, it would appear that at least a few Greek scholars understood the difference, such as Plato, Aristarchus of Samos, and Archimedes. But it is true that the vast majority of the population was not nearly as insightful and observant and would confuse divination and science. The reality is that we simply understand the world better than people used to, they were ignorant of even the most mundane of natural processes and because of this ignorance confused divination and science. So while it maybe true that these people could not distinguish between astronomy and astrology, I must ask, who cares what they thought?
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #46 on: December 22, 2010, 12:32:01 AM »

4) Who cares?
Those of us concerned with scientific education.


You're right on those Climategate emails then, aren't you?  Following up on those wikileaks on Al Gore the savior and his entourage, no?

You do know we've covered that in another thread, right?

What haven't we covered in another thread. Your point?

I'm not sure why you keep bringing it up,
The same reason you'd like it forgotten.

No, I don't think it should be forgotten, I have consistently demanded good science. No moral or political position is important enough to justify bad science. Plus, as I've said on this site before, while I think it's likely a degree of global warming is occurring, I don't think there is sufficiently rigorous scientific evidence that it's man made and we can do anything about it to justify policy changes. And even if it is actually happening, the mere fact that something is true is not enough reason to take it seriously and address it, there needs to be legitimate, verifiable, peer reviewed scientific research to justify it before we should even consider it to be anything more than a research topic.

As I said before, there are many threads on this site where I made that case.

Quote
but everyone pretty much agrees that the lack of rigor in their methodology is intolerable, that conclusions based on bad science should be dismissed, and that funding should be directed to those using proper scientific methodologies.

Was there anyone here that said otherwise?
Many act as if it never happened.

Some may...somewhere...but who on this site has defended the actions of these 'scientists'?
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #47 on: December 22, 2010, 12:38:05 AM »


Only "in Western 17th century philosophy." Before that, and aside from that, they are "one and the same discipline." I posted the link simply to introduce this history to those who were unaware of it.

I don't know that that is entirely true, it would appear that at least a few Greek scholars understood the difference, such as Plato, Aristarchus of Samos, and Archimedes. But it is true that the vast majority of the population was not nearly as insightful and observant and would confuse divination and science. The reality is that we simply understand the world better than people used to, they were ignorant of even the most mundane of natural processes and because of this ignorance confused divination and science. So while it maybe true that these people could not distinguish between astronomy and astrology, I must ask, who cares what they thought?
Who cares what you think?

And, btw, what is the difference between divination/magic and science. Since they are both obsessed with predictability, on a certain level, nothing.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #48 on: December 22, 2010, 12:47:05 AM »

4) Who cares?
Those of us concerned with scientific education.


You're right on those Climategate emails then, aren't you?  Following up on those wikileaks on Al Gore the savior and his entourage, no?

You do know we've covered that in another thread, right?

What haven't we covered in another thread. Your point?

I'm not sure why you keep bringing it up,
The same reason you'd like it forgotten.

No, I don't think it should be forgotten, I have consistently demanded good science. No moral or political position is important enough to justify bad science. Plus, as I've said on this site before, while I think it's likely a degree of global warming is occurring, I don't think there is sufficiently rigorous scientific evidence that it's man made and we can do anything about it to justify policy changes. And even if it is actually happening, the mere fact that something is true is not enough reason to take it seriously and address it, there needs to be legitimate, verifiable, peer reviewed scientific research to justify it before we should even consider it to be anything more than a research topic.

As I said before, there are many threads on this site where I made that case.
Oh? I found only this one:
I figured some shady things were going on, but never imagined it was this bad.

but everyone pretty much agrees that the lack of rigor in their methodology is intolerable, that conclusions based on bad science should be dismissed, and that funding should be directed to those using proper scientific methodologies.

Was there anyone here that said otherwise?
Many act as if it never happened.

Some may...somewhere...but who on this site has defended the actions of these 'scientists'?
Given how some pounce on, say, those who doubt evolution, the relative silence on the Climategate crew is deafening.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,725


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #49 on: December 22, 2010, 12:57:10 AM »

4) Who cares?
Those of us concerned with scientific education.


You're right on those Climategate emails then, aren't you?  Following up on those wikileaks on Al Gore the savior and his entourage, no?

You do know we've covered that in another thread, right?

What haven't we covered in another thread. Your point?

I'm not sure why you keep bringing it up,
The same reason you'd like it forgotten.

No, I don't think it should be forgotten, I have consistently demanded good science. No moral or political position is important enough to justify bad science. Plus, as I've said on this site before, while I think it's likely a degree of global warming is occurring, I don't think there is sufficiently rigorous scientific evidence that it's man made and we can do anything about it to justify policy changes. And even if it is actually happening, the mere fact that something is true is not enough reason to take it seriously and address it, there needs to be legitimate, verifiable, peer reviewed scientific research to justify it before we should even consider it to be anything more than a research topic.

As I said before, there are many threads on this site where I made that case.
Oh? I found only this one:
I figured some shady things were going on, but never imagined it was this bad.

but everyone pretty much agrees that the lack of rigor in their methodology is intolerable, that conclusions based on bad science should be dismissed, and that funding should be directed to those using proper scientific methodologies.

Was there anyone here that said otherwise?
Many act as if it never happened.

Some may...somewhere...but who on this site has defended the actions of these 'scientists'?
Given how some pounce on, say, those who doubt evolution, the relative silence on the Climategate crew is deafening.
Isa, do you really want to discuss the subject of this thread, or would you rather use this as an opportunity to attack someone on the unrelated issue of Climategate? If you would rather do the latter, could you please take it to another thread? You're derailing this one.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #50 on: December 22, 2010, 01:13:22 AM »

Isa, do you really want to discuss the subject of this thread, or would you rather use this as an opportunity to attack someone on the unrelated issue of Climategate? If you would rather do the latter, could you please take it to another thread? You're derailing this one.
Au contraire. Just showing that those concerned with scientific education have bigger issues of integrity to address, and that those who reject evoluationary theory do not thereby prove that they "have lost their grip on reality." So the evolutionists can stop their sneering.

4) Who cares?
Those of us concerned with scientific education.  

Hardly surprised though.  A sizable percentage of people have lost their grip on reality and believe in astrology, might as well believe in creationism while you are at it...
« Last Edit: December 22, 2010, 01:23:33 AM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,295


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #51 on: December 22, 2010, 01:14:56 AM »

as i demonstrated in the other thread, its actually the Protestants and the Muslims who are in association with Orthodox beliefs (and you recognized this in the other thread - you said that the Fathers are wrong because of their literal interpretation of Genesis). so yes, i'm glad that the heterodox have retained some seeds of the truth.
Unfortunately, the only thing you've demonstrated with any definitive authority on the other thread is that you just can't walk away from an argument. Roll Eyes

oh thank you, but actually i was responding to Minasoliman, who in the other thread acknowledged that the Fathers have consistently interpreted Genesis literally, which prompted him to say that the Fathers are wrong. your input sure is swell though!

No, I said their science is wrong.  Another stupid post.

right -- you think their "science" is wrong because their interpretation of Genesis is clearly incompatible with evolution. in post 2642 you said:

Quote
I'm going to be very clear with you.  The saints are wrong.  Period!

There was death.  Leaving evolution out of the picture, the evidence clearly shows death existed long before apes even existed.  The fossil records are consistent about this and don't lie.  I don't care if you don't agree with evolution.  But surely you are also rejecting other sciences when doing this.

the Saints dont believe there was death before sin, but because of evolution you do. so i haven't misrepresented what you said. i don't know what the point is of trying to deny what you said then.

and really dude, your bad mood isn't very becoming.

Well, I qualified that by showing you that many church fathers have disagreed with previous fathers based on wrong science.  It's not uncommon.  I also showed you that the unanimous belief of angels copulating with women was not even rejected until the third century.  I also asked you how does this effect my salvation?  Whether animals died or not before the fall have no salvific value to my soul.  I showed you that a ROCOR bishop expressed belief in this, and so even traditionalists understand what it means for something to have salvific value.  But since you repeat your comments and misrepresent me now, it no longer becomes a new comment to be dealt with for the first time, but it becomes a stupid comment.  It's not a bad mood.  It's common sense, which is what your post lacks.

Not to mention your Basilian liturgy also implied it.  I'm not sure what else I can tell you.  But you still haven't answered my question from before.  How does my belief affect my salvation?
« Last Edit: December 22, 2010, 01:20:27 AM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #52 on: December 22, 2010, 01:27:15 AM »

4) Who cares?
Those of us concerned with scientific education.


You're right on those Climategate emails then, aren't you?  Following up on those wikileaks on Al Gore the savior and his entourage, no?

You do know we've covered that in another thread, right?

What haven't we covered in another thread. Your point?

I'm not sure why you keep bringing it up,
The same reason you'd like it forgotten.

No, I don't think it should be forgotten, I have consistently demanded good science. No moral or political position is important enough to justify bad science. Plus, as I've said on this site before, while I think it's likely a degree of global warming is occurring, I don't think there is sufficiently rigorous scientific evidence that it's man made and we can do anything about it to justify policy changes. And even if it is actually happening, the mere fact that something is true is not enough reason to take it seriously and address it, there needs to be legitimate, verifiable, peer reviewed scientific research to justify it before we should even consider it to be anything more than a research topic.

As I said before, there are many threads on this site where I made that case.
Oh? I found only this one:
I figured some shady things were going on, but never imagined it was this bad.

but everyone pretty much agrees that the lack of rigor in their methodology is intolerable, that conclusions based on bad science should be dismissed, and that funding should be directed to those using proper scientific methodologies.

Was there anyone here that said otherwise?
Many act as if it never happened.

Some may...somewhere...but who on this site has defended the actions of these 'scientists'?
Given how some pounce on, say, those who doubt evolution, the relative silence on the Climategate crew is deafening.

And you STILL haven't said which poster you're referring too.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
jckstraw72
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,174



« Reply #53 on: December 22, 2010, 02:17:08 AM »

as i demonstrated in the other thread, its actually the Protestants and the Muslims who are in association with Orthodox beliefs (and you recognized this in the other thread - you said that the Fathers are wrong because of their literal interpretation of Genesis). so yes, i'm glad that the heterodox have retained some seeds of the truth.
Unfortunately, the only thing you've demonstrated with any definitive authority on the other thread is that you just can't walk away from an argument. Roll Eyes

oh thank you, but actually i was responding to Minasoliman, who in the other thread acknowledged that the Fathers have consistently interpreted Genesis literally, which prompted him to say that the Fathers are wrong. your input sure is swell though!

No, I said their science is wrong.  Another stupid post.

right -- you think their "science" is wrong because their interpretation of Genesis is clearly incompatible with evolution. in post 2642 you said:

Quote
I'm going to be very clear with you.  The saints are wrong.  Period!

There was death.  Leaving evolution out of the picture, the evidence clearly shows death existed long before apes even existed.  The fossil records are consistent about this and don't lie.  I don't care if you don't agree with evolution.  But surely you are also rejecting other sciences when doing this.

the Saints dont believe there was death before sin, but because of evolution you do. so i haven't misrepresented what you said. i don't know what the point is of trying to deny what you said then.

and really dude, your bad mood isn't very becoming.

Well, I qualified that by showing you that many church fathers have disagreed with previous fathers based on wrong science.  It's not uncommon.  I also showed you that the unanimous belief of angels copulating with women was not even rejected until the third century.  I also asked you how does this effect my salvation?  Whether animals died or not before the fall have no salvific value to my soul.  I showed you that a ROCOR bishop expressed belief in this, and so even traditionalists understand what it means for something to have salvific value.  But since you repeat your comments and misrepresent me now, it no longer becomes a new comment to be dealt with for the first time, but it becomes a stupid comment.  It's not a bad mood.  It's common sense, which is what your post lacks.

Not to mention your Basilian liturgy also implied it.  I'm not sure what else I can tell you.  But you still haven't answered my question from before.  How does my belief affect my salvation?

yes, you brought in the whole bit about angels to show that the overarching teaching can change, and so you're confident that the Church's literal interpretation of Genesis will change. so again, yes, you admitted that the Church interprets Genesis literally - you're just somehow certain that that will change, and i said you can get back to me when that happens. that was the whole reason you brought in the angels -- if the Church didn't have a uniform teaching then your point about the angels would have been completely meaningless to bring in. so no, i didnt misrepresent you. and i dont recall you demonstrating anything about Fathers disagreeing with Fathers based on wrong science ...

you posted something from St. Basil's liturgy about man being cast from the garden which actually mentioned nothing about the state of the world outside the garden before man's sin, so it proved absolutely nothing. my guess is you're assuming that the state of the world after the Fall is the same as its state before the Fall.

and asking "how does my belief affect my salvation?" is quite reductionist, and Protestant. i randomly asked my Protestant mom tonight how many wills she thinks Christ has and she said that wasn't even something she'd ever considered, but i don't think this will keep her from Heaven. for the Protestants such questions are meaningless, but for the Orthodox they are quite important because they point us to the true Christ. so i don't think that you believing that God is the author of death is going to automatically damn you, but it seems rather un-Orthodox to claim that it therefore doesn't matter. just because something might not affect you doesnt mean it doesnt matter. if the idea that God is the author of death were to become accepted in the Church that could have negative effects over time -- if God intends death then Christ must not really be the conqueror of death, etc. would believing in Chiliasm really send me to Hell? i highly doubt it, and yet the Church still found it necessary to combat it.

and for something that you're so sure doesnt affect your salvation and isnt important, you sure spend a lot of time arguing about it, and trying to find ways to prove the Fathers wrong.

you've derided several posts as being stupid. you're pretty clearly in a bad mood over what you perceive to be a lack of common sense. get a grip.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2010, 02:18:52 AM by jckstraw72 » Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,295


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #54 on: December 22, 2010, 02:23:14 AM »

alright then. I guess that's settled.  Since you know exactly what my mood is, then I ask you to pray for me.  And pray that God may show me the way, to prove that death didn't exist before the Fall.  And pray that God may reveal for us that these fossils are inconsistent in some way, one day.  Pray that God is not a charlatan by these fossil records.  And that God forbid, the death of animals effect the Church sacraments in some way.  One day maybe, we can baptize dogs and cats and hope that their partaking of the Eucharist also gives them the promise of General Resurrection because clearly, it's important that they too have to be alive with us rational creatures.

St. Lassie, pray for us.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2010, 02:26:11 AM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
jckstraw72
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,174



« Reply #55 on: December 22, 2010, 02:32:50 AM »

alright then. I guess that's settled.  Since you know exactly what my mood is, then I ask you to pray for me.  And pray that God may show me the way, to prove that death didn't exist before the Fall.  And pray that God may reveal for us that these fossils are inconsistent in some way, one day.  Pray that God is not a charlatan by these fossil records.  And that God forbid, the death of animals effect the Church sacraments in some way.  One day maybe, we can baptize dogs and cats and hope that their partaking of the Eucharist also gives them the promise of General Resurrection because clearly, it's important that they too have to be alive with us rational creatures.

St. Lassie, pray for us.

you seem to be unable to disagree with someone without falling into derision and sarcasm. its a shame. i read that whole EO vs. OO thread about Leo's Tome from a few years back - you were quite cordial there even though ozgeorge persisted in disagreement. wheres that minasoliman?

again, you're being reductionist.

God is not a charlatan because He gave us His holy Church to show us the Truth concerning His creative acts. we're only deceived if we lay aside revelation for enlightenment science. when science and Tradition conflict, why would you question Tradition rather than science?
Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,295


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #56 on: December 22, 2010, 02:45:03 AM »

alright then. I guess that's settled.  Since you know exactly what my mood is, then I ask you to pray for me.  And pray that God may show me the way, to prove that death didn't exist before the Fall.  And pray that God may reveal for us that these fossils are inconsistent in some way, one day.  Pray that God is not a charlatan by these fossil records.  And that God forbid, the death of animals effect the Church sacraments in some way.  One day maybe, we can baptize dogs and cats and hope that their partaking of the Eucharist also gives them the promise of General Resurrection because clearly, it's important that they too have to be alive with us rational creatures.

St. Lassie, pray for us.

you seem to be unable to disagree with someone without falling into derision and sarcasm. its a shame. i read that whole EO vs. OO thread about Leo's Tome from a few years back - you were quite cordial there even though ozgeorge persisted in disagreement. wheres that minasoliman?

again, you're being reductionist.

God is not a charlatan because He gave us His holy Church to show us the Truth concerning His creative acts. we're only deceived if we lay aside revelation for enlightenment science. when science and Tradition conflict, why would you question Tradition rather than science?

That's like saying, "Tradition teaches us that the sky is purple"  But science have shown that the sky is blue due at least by my own sight.

I can be cordial about people not understanding why we OO's believe what we believe because it's a long painful schism.  But when it comes to people who understand nothing about science, and jeopardize people's faith by telling them to reject science, reject what you observe, reject common sense and turn to tradition, then I resort to sarcasm because frankly I see this comments made as nothing more than a result of willful ignorance.

I've heard of many priests give "scientific" explanations for why a woman has to wait 80 days instead of 40 for her baby girl to be baptized in Egypt.  And he tells me a med student about something that I know it's false.  What does this say about us in front of others?  That Orthodox Christians are stupid ignorant people like the Jehovah's Witnesses who refuse blood transfusions or Christian Scientists who refuse any form of treatment whatsoever because they believe in the "healing power of prayer"?

And then I also get the derisive comment that people like me concede to atheism, that we're just one step closer to atheism.  And you expect me not to answer back to that false misrepresentation?  Forgive me Heorhij for bringing you into this if you're reading this, but here's a man who was an atheist and downright atheist and biology professor (and is a licensed physician in Ukraine), and became Christian.  Francis Collins MD was an atheist and a physician, an evolutionist, and became Christian.  I don't see that as concession, but as a free individual who studied and learned these things on his own.

Orthodox tradition does not cancel out common sense.

But seriously, if you feel I'm in the wrong, then pray for me.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2010, 03:10:53 AM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,725


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #57 on: December 22, 2010, 03:50:21 AM »

as i demonstrated in the other thread, its actually the Protestants and the Muslims who are in association with Orthodox beliefs (and you recognized this in the other thread - you said that the Fathers are wrong because of their literal interpretation of Genesis). so yes, i'm glad that the heterodox have retained some seeds of the truth.
Unfortunately, the only thing you've demonstrated with any definitive authority on the other thread is that you just can't walk away from an argument. Roll Eyes

oh thank you, but actually i was responding to Minasoliman, who in the other thread acknowledged that the Fathers have consistently interpreted Genesis literally, which prompted him to say that the Fathers are wrong. your input sure is swell though!
Yes, I know you were talking to Mina. However, I was a participant in the other thread long enough to know how impossible it is to argue with you. It's not that you know your stuff much better than I, because I see no evidence of any superior knowledge. It's just that you cannot possibly concede that you may be wrong about the Fathers and evolution. Arguing with you is therefore an exercise in futility, which explains why I DID walk away from that argument. I could only watch you insist on beating the dead horse long enough.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2010, 03:51:51 AM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #58 on: December 22, 2010, 03:55:45 AM »

as i demonstrated in the other thread, its actually the Protestants and the Muslims who are in association with Orthodox beliefs (and you recognized this in the other thread - you said that the Fathers are wrong because of their literal interpretation of Genesis). so yes, i'm glad that the heterodox have retained some seeds of the truth.
Unfortunately, the only thing you've demonstrated with any definitive authority on the other thread is that you just can't walk away from an argument. Roll Eyes

oh thank you, but actually i was responding to Minasoliman, who in the other thread acknowledged that the Fathers have consistently interpreted Genesis literally, which prompted him to say that the Fathers are wrong. your input sure is swell though!
Yes, I know you were talking to Mina. However, I was a participant in the other thread long enough to know how impossible it is to argue with you. It's not that you know your stuff much better than I, because I see no evidence of any superior knowledge. It's just that you cannot possibly concede that you may be wrong about the Fathers and evolution. Arguing with you is therefore an exercise in futility, which explains why I DID walk away from that argument. I could only watch you insist on beating the dead horse long enough.

Take it easy on him...people like him are the most convincing argument our side has. Wink
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Nigula Qian Zishi
Administrator Emeritus, Retired Deacon, Inactive Poster, Active Orthodox Christian, Father, and Husband
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
Posts: 1,836


我美丽的妻子和我。

nstanosheck
WWW
« Reply #59 on: December 22, 2010, 10:17:11 AM »

as i demonstrated in the other thread, its actually the Protestants and the Muslims who are in association with Orthodox beliefs (and you recognized this in the other thread - you said that the Fathers are wrong because of their literal interpretation of Genesis). so yes, i'm glad that the heterodox have retained some seeds of the truth.
Unfortunately, the only thing you've demonstrated with any definitive authority on the other thread is that you just can't walk away from an argument. Roll Eyes

oh thank you, but actually i was responding to Minasoliman, who in the other thread acknowledged that the Fathers have consistently interpreted Genesis literally, which prompted him to say that the Fathers are wrong. your input sure is swell though!
Yes, I know you were talking to Mina. However, I was a participant in the other thread long enough to know how impossible it is to argue with you. It's not that you know your stuff much better than I, because I see no evidence of any superior knowledge. It's just that you cannot possibly concede that you may be wrong about the Fathers and evolution. Arguing with you is therefore an exercise in futility, which explains why I DID walk away from that argument. I could only watch you insist on beating the dead horse long enough.

Take it easy on him...people like him are the most convincing argument our side has. Wink
The athiest evolutionist side?
Logged

在基督         My Original Blog
尼古拉         My Facebook Profile
前执事         My Twitter Page
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,048


"My god is greater."


« Reply #60 on: December 22, 2010, 11:20:59 AM »


Only "in Western 17th century philosophy." Before that, and aside from that, they are "one and the same discipline." I posted the link simply to introduce this history to those who were unaware of it.

I don't know that that is entirely true, it would appear that at least a few Greek scholars understood the difference, such as Plato, Aristarchus of Samos, and Archimedes.

I think you'll find that the way these ancients distinguished the terms has little to do with the way they are distinguished in modern science.

Quote
The reality is that we simply understand the world better than people used to, they were ignorant of even the most mundane of natural processes and because of this ignorance confused divination and science.

They may have been ignorant of many mundane matters, but it terms of the spiritual significance of the creation, they were far better educated than we.

Quote
So while it maybe true that these people could not distinguish between astronomy and astrology, I must ask, who cares what they thought?

You deny the existence of God and flaunt your philosophical ignorance, so who cares what you think? 
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #61 on: December 22, 2010, 11:41:01 AM »


Ok, so Astrology was Astronomy.
Logged
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,048


"My god is greater."


« Reply #62 on: December 22, 2010, 11:49:11 AM »


So I take it that you are an adherent of 17th century Western Philosophy?
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #63 on: December 22, 2010, 11:53:01 AM »


On the contrary, 17th century philosophy says that they were the same. Unless I'm missing something?   Huh
Logged
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #64 on: December 22, 2010, 12:25:29 PM »

as i demonstrated in the other thread, its actually the Protestants and the Muslims who are in association with Orthodox beliefs (and you recognized this in the other thread - you said that the Fathers are wrong because of their literal interpretation of Genesis). so yes, i'm glad that the heterodox have retained some seeds of the truth.
Unfortunately, the only thing you've demonstrated with any definitive authority on the other thread is that you just can't walk away from an argument. Roll Eyes

oh thank you, but actually i was responding to Minasoliman, who in the other thread acknowledged that the Fathers have consistently interpreted Genesis literally, which prompted him to say that the Fathers are wrong. your input sure is swell though!
Yes, I know you were talking to Mina. However, I was a participant in the other thread long enough to know how impossible it is to argue with you. It's not that you know your stuff much better than I, because I see no evidence of any superior knowledge. It's just that you cannot possibly concede that you may be wrong about the Fathers and evolution. Arguing with you is therefore an exercise in futility, which explains why I DID walk away from that argument. I could only watch you insist on beating the dead horse long enough.

Take it easy on him...people like him are the most convincing argument our side has. Wink
The athiest evolutionist side?

Yep.  Grin
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #65 on: December 22, 2010, 12:37:38 PM »


Only "in Western 17th century philosophy." Before that, and aside from that, they are "one and the same discipline." I posted the link simply to introduce this history to those who were unaware of it.

I don't know that that is entirely true, it would appear that at least a few Greek scholars understood the difference, such as Plato, Aristarchus of Samos, and Archimedes.

I think you'll find that the way these ancients distinguished the terms has little to do with the way they are distinguished in modern science.

It isn't about terms, it's about a basic understanding of reality.

Quote
Quote
The reality is that we simply understand the world better than people used to, they were ignorant of even the most mundane of natural processes and because of this ignorance confused divination and science.

They may have been ignorant of many mundane matters, but it terms of the spiritual significance of the creation, they were far better educated than we.

Which nothing more than an unsubstantiated personal opinion that can never rise to the significance of an objective, verifiable, and falsifiable science.

Quote
Quote
So while it maybe true that these people could not distinguish between astronomy and astrology, I must ask, who cares what they thought?

You deny the existence of God and flaunt your philosophical ignorance, so who cares what you think? 

No one should care what I think...or what anyone else thinks for that matter. That's the great thing about science, it's not based on personal credibility but on objective and verifiable observation. Judge the world based on the evidence given to us by science and ignore the worthless opinions of others, be they modern or ancient writers.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #66 on: December 22, 2010, 12:46:49 PM »

as i demonstrated in the other thread, its actually the Protestants and the Muslims who are in association with Orthodox beliefs (and you recognized this in the other thread - you said that the Fathers are wrong because of their literal interpretation of Genesis). so yes, i'm glad that the heterodox have retained some seeds of the truth.
Unfortunately, the only thing you've demonstrated with any definitive authority on the other thread is that you just can't walk away from an argument. Roll Eyes

oh thank you, but actually i was responding to Minasoliman, who in the other thread acknowledged that the Fathers have consistently interpreted Genesis literally, which prompted him to say that the Fathers are wrong. your input sure is swell though!
Yes, I know you were talking to Mina. However, I was a participant in the other thread long enough to know how impossible it is to argue with you. It's not that you know your stuff much better than I, because I see no evidence of any superior knowledge. It's just that you cannot possibly concede that you may be wrong about the Fathers and evolution. Arguing with you is therefore an exercise in futility, which explains why I DID walk away from that argument. I could only watch you insist on beating the dead horse long enough.

Take it easy on him...people like him are the most convincing argument our side has. Wink
The athiest evolutionist side?

Yep.  Grin

What GiC and others on here share in common is that we hold that there is an established scientific basis for the origin of man. Where we would disagree, however, is whether God had a hand in this process or not.
Logged
Heorhij
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA, for now, but my heart belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
Posts: 8,576



WWW
« Reply #67 on: December 22, 2010, 01:35:47 PM »

1 in 5 Americans believe the President is a Muslim.

Or, as my Texas relatives' neighbor says, a MusliN. Smiley

A certain number of Americans also believe that Joan of Arc was Noah's wife, and that it was OK to invade Iraq. 

Just because people believe something doesn't make it true.

Indeed. And I totally refuse to understand, why would people who have no serious knowledge in the field of biology even bother to "believe" or "not believe" in something that biologists study. By this logic, I might decide to not "believe" in the reality of the internal combustion engine.
Logged

Love never fails.
jckstraw72
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,174



« Reply #68 on: December 22, 2010, 02:33:33 PM »

alright then. I guess that's settled.  Since you know exactly what my mood is, then I ask you to pray for me.  And pray that God may show me the way, to prove that death didn't exist before the Fall.  And pray that God may reveal for us that these fossils are inconsistent in some way, one day.  Pray that God is not a charlatan by these fossil records.  And that God forbid, the death of animals effect the Church sacraments in some way.  One day maybe, we can baptize dogs and cats and hope that their partaking of the Eucharist also gives them the promise of General Resurrection because clearly, it's important that they too have to be alive with us rational creatures.

St. Lassie, pray for us.

you seem to be unable to disagree with someone without falling into derision and sarcasm. its a shame. i read that whole EO vs. OO thread about Leo's Tome from a few years back - you were quite cordial there even though ozgeorge persisted in disagreement. wheres that minasoliman?

again, you're being reductionist.

God is not a charlatan because He gave us His holy Church to show us the Truth concerning His creative acts. we're only deceived if we lay aside revelation for enlightenment science. when science and Tradition conflict, why would you question Tradition rather than science?

That's like saying, "Tradition teaches us that the sky is purple"  But science have shown that the sky is blue due at least by my own sight.

I can be cordial about people not understanding why we OO's believe what we believe because it's a long painful schism.  But when it comes to people who understand nothing about science, and jeopardize people's faith by telling them to reject science, reject what you observe, reject common sense and turn to tradition, then I resort to sarcasm because frankly I see this comments made as nothing more than a result of willful ignorance.

I've heard of many priests give "scientific" explanations for why a woman has to wait 80 days instead of 40 for her baby girl to be baptized in Egypt.  And he tells me a med student about something that I know it's false.  What does this say about us in front of others?  That Orthodox Christians are stupid ignorant people like the Jehovah's Witnesses who refuse blood transfusions or Christian Scientists who refuse any form of treatment whatsoever because they believe in the "healing power of prayer"?

And then I also get the derisive comment that people like me concede to atheism, that we're just one step closer to atheism.  And you expect me not to answer back to that false misrepresentation?  Forgive me Heorhij for bringing you into this if you're reading this, but here's a man who was an atheist and downright atheist and biology professor (and is a licensed physician in Ukraine), and became Christian.  Francis Collins MD was an atheist and a physician, an evolutionist, and became Christian.  I don't see that as concession, but as a free individual who studied and learned these things on his own.

Orthodox tradition does not cancel out common sense.

But seriously, if you feel I'm in the wrong, then pray for me.

of course i will pray for you, and please pray for me. please forgive me for provoking you.
Logged
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.159 seconds with 52 queries.