Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Ted Kirkpatrick and Animal Cruelty

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
    Well, I'm certainly not a "progressive Christian", whatever that is. I'm also fairly certain that most Christians would not self-identify as such, but feel free to offer contrary evidence."
    http://progressivechristianity.org/

    There ya go. (I know, I know, they're not REAL Christians)

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by pancreasman View Post
      http://progressivechristianity.org/

      There ya go. (I know, I know, they're not REAL Christians)
      Which is why they should stop calling themselves that.
      "As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths." Isaiah 3:12

      There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by Darth Executor View Post
        Which is why they should stop calling themselves that.
        They start from different assumptions from you. Who owns the trademark to Christianity?

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by Darth Executor View Post
          Which is why they should stop calling themselves that.
          Perhaps I went overboard. Even some conservative Christians like yourself accept that eusociality evolved. OBP is saying that's an "unfounded assumption," which is as bizarre as saying evolution is an unfounded assumption. Turns out he's an anti-evolutionist.

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by Tassman View Post
            Ah well, you already have your conclusions don't you? Any pesky contradictory evidence can thus be hand waved away as an act of faith.
            That is very funny!
            ...>>> Witty remark or snarky quote of another poster goes here <<<...

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by pancreasman View Post
              They start from different assumptions from you. Who owns the trademark to Christianity?
              What assumptions are those? If I'm not mistaken they don't hold that it is necessary to believe in the physical resurrection of Christ to be a Christian. I think that is a fairly central doctrine.
              Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by pancreasman View Post
                Who owns the trademark to Christianity?
                Presumably Christ.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                  Inasmuch as psychology encompasses behaviour it is a component of biology and certainly our evolved natural instincts are biology.
                  Feel free to back up that assertion with fact.
                  Yes it explains “what happens”. And “why” can only refer to a reason or explanation in science, NOT ‘purpose’. There is no “purpose” as such.
                  I understand that, thanks.
                  "Should" has nothing to do with it. But it’s demonstrably true that there is a survival instinct. Ever tried to swat a fly?
                  I understand that as well. I'm interested in why a survival instinct would develop. As you're so fond of telling me, there is no 'purpose' in evolution. Survival is rather purposeful.
                  It’s demonstrably true that all social species are thus predisposed. That’s the very definition of “social species”, i.e. animals which interact highly with others of their own species, to the point of having a recognizable society.
                  As usual, you're avoiding my question.
                  …and “two or more” social animals are predisposed toward cooperative behaviour. Among social species they all are. That’s what being a social animal is by definition. You really have an abysmal understanding of Evolution and Natural Selection.
                  ... and you continue to do so.
                  Given that Instincts are innate, fixed patterns of behaviour how would they not have a “genetic basis”?
                  That's probably the most likely basis given a materialistic worldview. However, given the paucity of evidence you're taking it as an article of faith.
                  Group survival, not individual survival, is the raison d’ętre of social species. Individual acts of self-sacrifice for the good of one’s community or family are not uncommon whereas individual acts of selfishness are not viewed favourably by the group.
                  I understand that. I'm not arguing against that. I'm talking about how one putatively evolves into a social species.
                  Ah well, you already have your conclusions don't you? Any pesky contradictory evidence can thus be hand waved away as an act of faith.
                  Ah, well. If you can't answer my questions, respond by avoidance and poisoning the well. I can't wave away any evidence if you haven't presented any.
                  Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                  Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                  sigpic
                  I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by whag View Post
                    Perhaps I went overboard. Even some conservative Christians like yourself accept that eusociality evolved. OBP is saying that's an "unfounded assumption," which is as bizarre as saying evolution is an unfounded assumption.
                    I said no such thing. You are utterly morally bankrupt, aren't you?
                    Turns out he's an anti-evolutionist.
                    More like anti-materialist.
                    Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                    Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                    sigpic
                    I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                      I said no such thing. You are utterly morally bankrupt, aren't you?

                      More like anti-materialist.
                      An "anti-naturalist/anti-materialist" isn't at all the same as an "anti-evolutionist." Purposeful conflation of that sort is moral bankruptcy.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        One Bad Pig, to clarify, what did you mean when you said evolution is "just a theory?" That's not something that a theistic evolutionist would typically say, since they'd already know the utility of theory in science.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by whag View Post
                          An "anti-naturalist/anti-materialist" isn't at all the same as an "anti-evolutionist." Purposeful conflation of that sort is moral bankruptcy.
                          I never claimed to be an anti-evolutionist. Perhaps you shouldn't conflate the terms.
                          One Bad Pig, to clarify, what did you mean when you said evolution is "just a theory?" That's not something that a theistic evolutionist would typically say, since they'd already know the utility of theory in science.
                          I told you already - check a dictionary. "Theory" and "fact" mean different things. Further, I don't think I'd call myself a "theistic evolutionist," though I quite understand the utility of theory in science.
                          Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                          Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                          sigpic
                          I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by Adrift View Post
                            Presumably Christ.
                            That's all very well but he seems to have lots of spokesmen who claim to be in touch with head office who contradict each other.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                              I never claimed to be an anti-evolutionist. Perhaps you shouldn't conflate the terms.

                              I told you already - check a dictionary. "Theory" and "fact" mean different things
                              I didn't say they're exactly same but questioned what you meant by "still a theory." I still have no idea what you meant if you didn't mean it in the creationist sense.

                              Originally posted by One Bad Pig
                              Further, I don't think I'd call myself a "theistic evolutionist," though I quite understand the utility of theory in science.
                              No one who understands its utility would ever say "it's still a theory." That's a meaningless statement because it assumes a theory graduates into the higher state of "fact." A theory exists to explain the different pieces of consilient evidence that together explain an overarching truth. The truth is that life really evolves.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by pancreasman View Post
                                That's all very well but he seems to have lots of spokesmen who claim to be in touch with head office who contradict each other.
                                To be fair, seer pointed out there's a standard for calling it Christian, such as belief in bodily resurrection. If you meet that standard, then Jesus, the holder of the trademark, officially brands you with the trademark. According to Christianity, some people will go about using the trademark without permission.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by tabibito, 05-12-2022, 10:42 PM
                                42 responses
                                299 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by Alien, 03-31-2022, 02:43 PM
                                1,993 responses
                                10,796 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post little_monkey  
                                Started by rstrats, 02-13-2021, 12:23 PM
                                59 responses
                                512 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X