Ahh, this thread, so rich and entertaining. EHK on his usual fanatically anti-religious tirade. Others chiming in with a straw God that they can beat up to make themselves feel good, and pat themselves on the back at how intellectually superior they are compared to those blind religious types. Christians bearing witness to evolution in a "I have black friends too you know" kind of way. People hanging their notion of creation on a story that was told to a bunch of people 3500 years ago who collectively had an understanding of the sciences equivalent to that of a 2-year old today (probably a bit unfair on today's 2-year olds). Still more folk throwing in sarcastic witicisms. And now we have moved on to the advanced theology of the nature of the devil and angels. Next class, the classic Islamic conundrum of how many angels can fit on the head of a pin. I'm guilty too, I even started one of these threads some time ago, possibly even identifying the same bit of research that was the genesis of this thread, seems like similar percentages to me. Though I was more hopeful in my interpretation that there seemed to be a pretty decent number of Christians who it turns out really do have black friends. Cool, a point of common ground, we should celebrate the fact that since the time of Darwin until now the number of Christians who now recognise evolution as truth has gone from zero to, what was it? 30 odd percent? Has that % really gone down, or was previous research flawed? But NOOOOO! Christians are not allowed to accept evolution as truth and still be Christians, it's not fair! Evolution is meant to be proof against the existence of God, so being Christian and accepting evolution as truth is meant to make that person explode in a cloud of mutual exclusivity. Conversely for the remaining Christian dogmatists, Christians who accept evolution as fact are not true Christians and have repudiated the bible and Jesus, and will burn in hell with the sodomites.
We are all so determined to take up antagonistic positions, how is this achieving any positive advance? We are merely entrenching ourselves and others into positions of mutual disrespect.
So you are an atheist, and you want religious people to accept science as a source of truth about the world? Do you think that trashing their religion to their face is going to help? Or are you not really interested in advancing the cause of science, but more in destroying the edifice of Religion? Religion will outlast you, it outlasted Darwin, and it will outlast Dawkins. The edifice of religion has some pretty extensive dry rot no question, but its foundation is incorruptible and indestructible. The canker you see about you is only a crumbling facade, it will remain even though the facade crumbles to dust.
Stop wasting your time railing against something you cannot hope to destroy. Try finding a constructive way to bring science to those with eyes to see an ears to hear, even though some will see the majesty of God in the form and fragrance of a rose, rather than a random and direction-less confluence of matter and events. And for those too blind to see, and too deaf to hear, leave them to their own obliviousness, because in the end they and their machinations will come to naught.
So you are an religious, and you want atheists to acknowledge religion as a source of truth about the world? Do you think that trashing their scientific views to their face is going to help? Or are you not really interested in advancing the cause of religion, but more in destroying the edifice of science? Science will outlast you, it outlasted the Roman Inquisition, and it will outlast Pat Buchanan. The edifice of science has some pretty extensive spiritual petrification no question, but its foundation is incorruptible and indestructible. The rigidity you see about you is the brittle callous formed from historical religious antagonism, but it will remain even though the callous be worn away to nothing.
Stop wasting your time railing against something you cannot hope to destroy. Try finding a constructive way to bring acceptance of the beneficial history of religion to those with eyes to see an ears to hear, even though some will see a random and direction-less confluence of matter and events in the form and fragrance of a rose, rather than the majesty of God. And for those too blind to see, and too deaf to hear, leave them to their own obliviousness, because in the end they and their machinations will come to naught.
Edited by The Anti-Targ, 05 May 2009 - 06:59 AM.