How did you reach your conclusion

[☭proletarian☭]

Science does help, but it seems that we all poick and choose what part of science to accept as final fact. Even science has to recant, retest, and form new conclusions.

Yes, honest people admit when they're wrong. Our friends at church wouldn't understand.

 

[Big Fitz]

Science does help, but it seems that we all poick and choose what part of science to accept as final fact. Even science has to recant, retest, and form new conclusions.

Yes, honest people admit when they're wrong. Our friends at church wouldn't understand.

Now now... I'm sure Dr. Mann, Paul Erlich and the Warmists aren't going to either regarding their faith.

 

[amrchaos]

Science does help, but it seems that we all poick and choose what part of science to accept as final fact. Even science has to recant, retest, and form new conclusions.

Yes, honest people admit when they're wrong. Our friends at church wouldn't understand.

Now now... I'm sure Dr. Mann, Paul Erlich and the Warmists aren't going to either regarding their faith.

Actually, they will not have to.


If what they believe is shown not to have merit, these individuals and their "beliefs" will go the way of Alchemical texts and Astrology. They are now being critically reviewed and their methods of data collecting are being scrutinized and recorded.


Note:Applied science is the wrong field to become a con artist in. Theology, on the other hand, can let a con artist make millions LEGALLY.

That is the nature of the disciplines. Skeptics tend to weed out the nonsensical. The believers embrace the insanity.

 

[Big Fitz]

If what they believe is shown not to have merit, these individuals and their "beliefs" will go the way of Alchemical texts and Astrology.

Elimination by attrition isn't quite the same thing, but gets the job done quite effectively. We're starting to see that with the baby boomers and the slow death of the 60's radical. Of course, they're in last desperate gasp mode to justify their legacy right now. But all it's doing is pissing off their children and grandchildren, guaranteeing their rapid elimination from the political and philosophical arena. And as the price of their foolishness is felt more and more, this will only increase in speed.

One plus thing to P-BO care... they'll be flushed much faster.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Science does help, but it seems that we all poick and choose what part of science to accept as final fact. Even science has to recant, retest, and form new conclusions.

Yes, honest people admit when they're wrong. Our friends at church wouldn't understand.

Now now... I'm sure Dr. Mann, Paul Erlich and the Warmists aren't going to either regarding their faith.

I thought we established that a long time ago...

 

[Big Fitz]

Yes, honest people admit when they're wrong. Our friends at church wouldn't understand.

Now now... I'm sure Dr. Mann, Paul Erlich and the Warmists aren't going to either regarding their faith.

I thought we established that a long time ago...

Yes, but you said that our friends at church wouldn't understand. This implies either faith makes you dishonest or church makes you dishonest. Something of a logical fallacy there IMHO. You are implying mutual exclusivity between church/faith and honesty.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

You are implying mutual exclusivity between church/faith and honesty.

And? Faith spells the end of honest consideration of the facts. Just look at the Catholics or the Warmers.

I see no difference between the two, really.

 

[Big Fitz]

You are implying mutual exclusivity between church/faith and honesty.

And? Faith spells the end of honest consideration of the facts. Just look at the Catholics or the Warmers.

I see no difference between the two, really.

And that is the significant point of difference between us.

Faith in my mind is a choice to believe, regardless of, or lacking evidence proving the belief.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Now now... I'm sure Dr. Mann, Paul Erlich and the Warmists aren't going to either regarding their faith.

I thought we established that a long time ago...

Yes, but you said that our friends at church wouldn't understand. This implies either faith makes you dishonest or church makes you dishonest. Something of a logical fallacy there IMHO. You are implying mutual exclusivity between church/faith and honesty.

See.....this is where they hid it.........

Faith does not make you dishonest.

Church does not make you dishonest.

LEADING a church or faith is what makes you dishonest. Need examples? How's about Ted Haggard, Warren Jeffs, John Ensign, Larry Craig and all the others.

By the way, a really simple definition for faith? It's a willingness to believe in the possibilities.

First time? I do it on faith, trusting that it's true.

Each time after? I do it on belief, because I've already proven to myself it works.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

You are implying mutual exclusivity between church/faith and honesty.

And? Faith spells the end of honest consideration of the facts. Just look at the Catholics or the Warmers.

I see no difference between the two, really.

And that is the significant point of difference between us.

Faith in my mind is a choice to believe, regardless of, or lacking evidence proving the belief.

First off, true belief is not a conscious choice. Secondly, choosing to disregard evidence contradicting your faith or lack of supporting evidence is choosing to not consider the facts and evidence in honesty, thereby proving my point.

 

[Big Fitz]

And? Faith spells the end of honest consideration of the facts. Just look at the Catholics or the Warmers.

I see no difference between the two, really.

And that is the significant point of difference between us.

Faith in my mind is a choice to believe, regardless of, or lacking evidence proving the belief.

First off, true belief is not a conscious choice. Secondly, choosing to disregard evidence contradicting your faith or lack of supporting evidence is choosing to not consider the facts and evidence in honesty, thereby proving my point.

First off, true belief is not a conscious choice. Secondly, choosing to disregard evidence contradicting your faith or lack of supporting evidence is choosing to not consider the facts and evidence in honesty, thereby proving my point.

Nope. That is your belief based on faith. You have no proof your theory is correct, yet you believe it is.

LEADING a church or faith is what makes you dishonest. Need examples? How's about Ted Haggard, Warren Jeffs, John Ensign, Larry Craig and all the others.

And that means the tens and hundreds of thousands of church and other leaders in every faith are dishonest? That smacks of an intellectual bias against all faith, thereby tainting your judgment. Have you ever met a church leader you considered honest?

 

[ABikerSailor]

And that is the significant point of difference between us.

Faith in my mind is a choice to believe, regardless of, or lacking evidence proving the belief.

First off, true belief is not a conscious choice. Secondly, choosing to disregard evidence contradicting your faith or lack of supporting evidence is choosing to not consider the facts and evidence in honesty, thereby proving my point.

First off, true belief is not a conscious choice. Secondly, choosing to disregard evidence contradicting your faith or lack of supporting evidence is choosing to not consider the facts and evidence in honesty, thereby proving my point.

Nope. That is your belief based on faith. You have no proof your theory is correct, yet you believe it is.

LEADING a church or faith is what makes you dishonest. Need examples? How's about Ted Haggard, Warren Jeffs, John Ensign, Larry Craig and all the others.

And that means the tens and hundreds of thousands of church and other leaders in every faith are dishonest? That smacks of an intellectual bias against all faith, thereby tainting your judgment. Have you ever met a church leader you considered honest?

First, I wan to know from proletarian how it is possible to not be conscious about what you believe? In order for a belief to keep going, it has to be thought about CONSCIOUSLY.

As far as every leader being dishonest? I didn't say that. I said that LEADING is what causes trouble.

What? You've never heard the maxim that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely?

It's true you know. Especially in the cases where people decide to abuse their power.

But........not everyone does that.

Have I personally ever met a church leader I would consider honest?

No. Why? They all tell me there is only 1 way to God. Hate to tell 'em, but there's a LOT more than just 1.

Judaism, Taoism, Hinduism, Native American beliefs...............

No, Yeshua isn't the only way to God.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

:facepalm:

If you're unable to discern between faith, reality, and theory, you might want to stop posting now before you make a fool of yourself.

And that means the tens and hundreds of thousands of church and other leaders in every faith are dishonest?

If they refuse to consider the available evidence in honesty, yes. While I can't speak for all of them, I know that this is the case with many of those I've encountered.

Have you ever met a church leader you considered honest?

I have not. They were all willfully ignorant and refused to hear out, seek out, or consider new evidence. They were looking for God, not truth, and they had no interest on any sign that they were headed in the wrong direction.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

First, I wan to know from proletarian how it is possible to not be conscious about what you believe? In order for a belief to keep going, it has to be thought about CONSCIOUSLY.

I did not say you aren't aware of what you believe., but that you cannot simply choose to believe something other than what you believe in you metaphorical heart. You could say that Obama is the greatest president ever may be able to argue both pro and con, but you cannot simply choose to change what is written on your heart any more than you can choose whom you are attracted to. To equate beliefs with clothing that can be changed at will is simply not accurate.

As far as every leader being dishonest? I didn't say that. I said that LEADING is what causes trouble.

Hold up. I missed something. What are we discussing in this part?

What? You've never heard the maxim that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely?

Have I personally ever met a church leader I would consider honest?

No. Why? They all tell me there is only 1 way to God. Hate to tell 'em, but there's a LOT more than just 1.

Were they being dishonest, or were they simply wrong? Is it dishonesty to state what you truly believe? I posit that to be dishonest in the sense you use the term- to lie- requires willfully misleading or misrepresenting.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Really? You've never heard of someone who has lost their faith in Christianity, and converted to IsLAME?

How about the people that get sucked in by cults? Are you telling me that they've always been cult followers?

Might wanna reconsider that stuff dude. Because, if your views can never be changed, then you are doomed to go the way of the dinosaur, as you are obviously incapable of evolving. Not really a hit at you as much as your way of thinking.

Sorry, but if we were never able to change a fundamental belief, then how did it become so easy to adjust to the idea of mankind flying in the skies?

Remember..........before the Wright brothers, the belief was that it would never happen. Matter of fact, a lot of the reporters waited for a while before phoning in their reports, as they were scared that they would be called drunks and liars.

As far as the second part? It wasn't for you. It was for Big Fitz.

 

[Big Fitz]

:facepalm:

If you're unable to discern between faith, reality, and theory, you might want to stop posting now before you make a fool of yourself.

And that means the tens and hundreds of thousands of church and other leaders in every faith are dishonest?

If they refuse to consider the available evidence in honesty, yes. While I can't speak for all of them, I know that this is the case with many of those I've encountered.

Have you ever met a church leader you considered honest?

I have not. They were all willfully ignorant and refused to hear out, seek out, or consider new evidence. They were looking for God, not truth, and they had no interest on any sign that they were headed in the wrong direction.

Then how can you honestly participate in any discussion where you assume the other side is universally dishonest?

Since experience is the coin of your realm I must say I have only HEARD of dishonest preachers. I have never MET one.

As far as every leader being dishonest? I didn't say that. I said that LEADING is what causes trouble.

This is a distinction without a meaning. That implies that every leader from the coach of a team to the president of the US to the Pope is dishonest because they lead.

I don't believe I'm the one looking the fool here by making such universal statements.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Really? You've never heard of someone who has lost their faith in Christianity, and converted to IsLAME?

How about the people that get sucked in by cults? Are you telling me that they've always been cult followers?

Citing examples people who's beliefs changed and who then acted based on their beliefs (choosing to practice Islam because they came to believe it was correct) does not support you assertion that they willfully changed their beliefs.

Might wanna reconsider that stuff dude. Because, if your views can never be changed, then you are doomed to go the way of the dinosaur, as you are obviously incapable of evolving. Not really a hit at you as much as your way of thinking.

Do cite where I ever said that someone's beliefs can't be changed. You seem to be lacking reading comprehension skills here.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Fitz, when quoting more than one person, please include the name of the person being quoted when it changes. Post 136 appears to attribute ABikerSailor's words to me.

 

[Truthspeaker]

it was minted by a Christian pilgrim around the 11th century

There you have it- PROOF that someone in the 11th century was a christian

I can prove that there are people in the 21st century who think the same thing, What's your point?

Well I see now that the coin is purported to have been made long After Christs death. Well we have proof of Christians living in Jesus time and prior to Jesus time so it only makes it less interesting...That is the coin itself. But still interesting nonetheless.

Anywhoo. It's not hard to make sense of the statement that Jesus was a real historical character. But that is a discussion for another thread....Moving on to more thread related comments.

 

[Truthspeaker]

Why is that video irrelevant? Because YOU don't believe it has any credence?

Remember.......they told the Wright Brothers that flight was impossible.

What is truth for someone over in Utah is exceedingly irrelevant when you're on the island of Ibiza during the summer.

Might wanna try to loosen your bias dude.

The video is irrelevant because they point out how life starts but fail to recognize the power behind it. Claiming it organized into life all by itself. "Evolve" is the popular word they use.

There is an intelligence at the base of every creation and anti religious zealots hate to admit that there is a creative power behind all this.

That is why it is irrelevant. Btw, I thought your supposed claim to Judaism makes you a creationist. What side of the fence are you on "dude"? And who's from Utah in this conversation? Better czech your bias "homey".