Jump to content

Why do I find Evangelical Christians irritating?


Ser Scot A Ellison

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

A common error in this debate.

It is not the probability that one organism would engage in random mutation (steered by natural selection) over billions of years to change into a different organism, that is absurdly low. Or rather, that is indeed absurdly low, as you indicate, but that is not what is being argued against

It is the probability that any species, out of the billions of species that have ever existed, would be able to undergo the series of mutations required to change so radically over the billions of years of existence, that is absurdly low. Because the vast majority of mutations are harmful, for one. And an absurdly fortunate combination of mutations is required to achieve even the smallest evolutionary change, let alone changing a single celled organism into an elephant over the course of billions of years.

 

That bolded part is so very wrong, and represents a huge misunderstanding of evolution, mutation, how genes change (hint it isn't always through mutation), and so many other ideas that I only have a slight understanding of, and would not dare to explain them.  But if you are interested, I'd be happy to scrounge up some educational resources. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DunderMifflin said:

Yeh but what if 1000 years go by, some new world government pops up and changes all of Dawkins' literature to make him look like Super Scientist.

Lies would be spread about him such as he could jump to different planets and bring atheists back from the dead.

Can anyone be a true Dawkinist in this warped future?????

No one would believe it! Everyone would notice that the Gospel of Harris wasn't actually written by Harris but years after his death, and Dawkins' letters to Atheism+  are clearly forgeries!

And Dawkins never claims to be Einstein in the earliest works!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the topic of the initial question - Scot, might it be because they evangelize?  The feeling of someone trying to sell you something - whether or not you want that thing - is sort of uniquely distasteful. I had to purchase a car recently, and it was an appalling experience even though I, y'know, wanted to buy a car.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, DunderMifflin said:

Yeh but what if 1000 years go by, some new world government pops up and changes all of Dawkins' literature to make him look like Super Scientist.

Lies would be spread about him such as he could jump to different planets and bring atheists back from the dead.

Can anyone be a true Dawkinist in this warped future?????

A time traveler named Eric Theodore Cartman?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Castel said:

Wait...some people don't keep files on GenChat's familiar faces?

 

10 hours ago, Kalbear said:

You've argued that a whole bunch. And yes, I do have files listing every thing that everyone has written. It's my secret plan to somehow have data stored on a computer somewhere which records things people type on a website. AND YOU'VE RUINED IT

I mean, maybe you don't keep them on everyone but surely most people keep files on the top posters? And by any metric Scot is going to be in that list. How else would I have known to bring up Denethor? Certainly not from memory, I can assure you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎11‎/‎2‎/‎2016 at 7:38 PM, karaddin said:

You forgot one

* Movie Denethor is a corruption of the sacred text

Yes.  As were most of the characters in the movie The Shining. 

11 hours ago, Kalbear said:

You've argued that a whole bunch. And yes, I do have files listing every thing that everyone has written. It's my secret plan to somehow have data stored on a computer somewhere which records things people type on a website. AND YOU'VE RUINED IT

Good gods.  I really hope that the section of drive containing some of my past posts has been corrupted.  There's a few of them I cringe to recall.

3 hours ago, Ariadne23 said:

Know this time child. I shall smash your skull like a clam on my tummy!

Hee-hee-heee-hee! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Castel said:

There have to be some Christian scholars out there with a really pared down Christology that would be considered impolite in conservative churches.

 

I wonder what the most radical would be? Skepticism about virgin birth is probably certainly up there?

The retired Bishop John Shelby Spong is a good example. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Shelby_Spong

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Pebbles said:

Question,  Scot do you find Evangelical Christians more Irritating than Daylight saving time clock changes?

 

And in the interests in full disclosure, there are some people I don't need to keep files on, since its all committed to memory.

Now that's a tought one...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Three basic problems

1.        They never hold the members of the group to the same standards as those groups that they see as a threat Atheists, Liberals, people of other religions

2.       They suffer from a really bizarre persecution complex.  Many of them are actually convinced that Christians in the United States are in the same boat as Christians in Muslim countries for example. 

3.       When cornered they tend to invoke the “No True Scotsman” logical fallacy.   Even if an individual Christian is at fault the wider group is never to blame. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3-11-2016 at 3:26 PM, sologdin said:

that's damned interesting.  what would the bare essence of christianity be?  can you cut out everything but the resurrection of christ and still get there?  do we need the anti-sodomy rules, for instance, or the young earth creationism?  those two items seem fairly incidental and attenuated in comparison to the core christological and soteriological questions, say.  

Depends on what approach you take. There are probably a multitude of theological pathways. But I prefer a more whimsical numbers approach.

As a first order approximation to be Christian is to be Roman Catholic. As a second order approximation we can add the orthodox descendants of Constantine's church and the high church state churches from the reformation (a lot of Lutherans and Anglicans). And in that description the bare form is christianity seems to be the form, the ceremonies, the living church, the community.

Which is consistent with the fact that Christians outside that main definition (even if they are part of the churches,or indeed their nominal leaders) and are evangelizing, moralizing, focussing on scripture and rules, etc are seen as unbecoming and uncouth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

World Dominionists are BORING one-trackers, who cannot ever be wrong because they claim God's will and the Bible as authority for everything. thus annoying beyond belief -- as well as boring.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎11‎/‎6‎/‎2016 at 0:16 PM, Zorral said:

World Dominionists are BORING one-trackers, who cannot ever be wrong because they claim God's will and the Bible as authority for everything. thus annoying beyond belief -- as well as boring.

 

so, bornoying?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...