Slashdot Mirror

Um, I'm only posting AC because I never make enough comments to get an account, but don't downmod me just for that.

A fundamental belief in Islam is that through the ages, the uncorrupted Bible became rife with revisions and mistakes - the resurrection of Jesus being a prime example (the other big one being the trinity).

If this text is from 4th Century and Islam arose as a religion in the 7th Century, we should be able to compare the text we have now and the one in the 4th century to determine if the bible actually has become corrupted and reife with revisions, etc.

And actually, this is nothing new. We've been able to look at the dead sea scrolls and other codecs to determine how accurate the text is. see link ( or here, or here ... and there are others).

There isn't? Really? hmm, wow, thats something new. http://www.probe.org/content/view/18/77/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jeff_lowder /jury/chap5.html

(Context: experimentation on embryos -> abortion -> abortion vs. capital punishment -> innocence vs. guilt -> original sin)

No exceptions, not even for a newborn babe. All. Not even one. Pretty clear on this subject.

Christian teachers are divided in their interpretation of this scripture, as to whether or not God the Most Merciful extends forgiveness to those who have not had a chance to understand sin. Consider this scripture:

"Let the children alone, and do not hinder them from coming to me; for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these." And after laying His hands on them, He departed. (Matthew 19:13-15)

You may find a further analysis interesting.

What the F***?!

"The difficulty with the folks who do not accept evolutionary ideas is that they tend to be extremely narrow in their perspective and logic is simply not part of their thought process."

WRONG. Faith does not make someone close minded you dolt. Faith is belief in that which is unprovable - for or against. People chose to believe that we are not an accident cause by some random act of life creation billions of years ago and some random set of "evolutionary steps" which at some point in time turned into conciousness, self awareness, and IQ.

"Add to that the notion that your neighbour's sins affect you as well and the current situation is easy to understand."

What the FUCK!? Aside from having nothing to do with any argument for or against evolution, this statement is the most base statement of (making up a word here) uninformatism that I have ever had the displeasure of reading. Who believes that their neighbour's sins affect them? I'm Roman Catholic, and I don't. No one I know does, aside from the fallout that may be caused by that sin (people caught in another's lies, or victims of crime.)

"Likely not to happen while Christian Conservatives still hold popular sway in politics, nor until science figures out how to convey its teachings to the lowest common denominator."

Congratulations. You have managed to insult approximately 2.8 billion Christians across the world at once. I congratulate you up there on your pedestal of progressiveness and your incredible insight. I bow to your superior intellect and apologize for being the lowest common denominator that people of your stature must constantly struggle against.

People can't accept that there are those of us in the world that simply like to believe that there is a divine plan in life. We like to believe that there is a greater power that devised life as we know it. We like to believe that conciousness and self-awareness, along with free-will, are divine gifts and not accidental mutations which proved to be better suited than those beings without such mutations.

Finally, we like to believe that life and DNA is so incredibly complex and diverse, that chance is not a plausible explanation for the current state and diversity of life. But being uninformed, lowest denominator automatons of Christian zealots who look to unseat the very laws of biology (oh wait, evolution is a theory, not a law - way to go, oh wise one) I humbly apologize for believing in Intelligent Design and perhaps even Creationism.

Pompous Asshole.

- Dr Ian Macreadie, who admits in an interview published on a creationist website that he is ridiculed by other scientists for his beliefs in regards to evolution. In addition, he believes that death was impossible before humans were around and thus that the fossil record is some kind of hoax? (I guess, its kind of hard to understand what exactly he is trying to say, other than that he thinks dinosaurs couldn't have died before the apple story in genesis brought death into the world).

- Dr. John R. Meyer, who directly profits from sales of books and materials to people trying to push the creationist agenda, notably CRS Publications, an organization that makes its living from selling this bullshit.

- Dr. Carl B Fliermans, a bioligst who specializes in soil microbiology and works primarily for the government, a job (like many) made more secure by registering as a "creationist," and yet a man who's (large and respected) body of work shows no evidence of a scientific critque of evolution as a whole. An "incedental creationist" if you will.

- Dr Raymond G. Bohlin, who (from the link you posted) has a direct personal financial interest in pushing creationism over evolution. He works for Probe Ministries http://www.probe.org/, a Religious organization that posts on their front page, "Want to know how to have a relationship with God? Donate to Probe."

- Mr. Gary Parker, who has based his professional carreer and personal financial stability largely on writing books and lecturing on creationism to people who already support creationism.

Having someone who got through college then turn around and get paid to repeatedly tell you "you're right, you know, even though all of my colleages who actually know about this stuff disagree with us," is not a valid response.

Honestly, if that is the best you can do (a five second search on google and posting some names you found on a pro-creation website without even looking at the guys beyond what the site told you) all you're doing is showing how weak your faith and your religion is, that the search for truth and understanding is considered a direct threat to its continuence.

Except if you step on to federal property, live in DC, New York city, Chicago, or in a subdivision with a self-appointed "homeowner's association" that forbids the owning, much less the carrying, of firearms. Many jurisdictions consider the visible display of a firearm "brandishing", and will arrest you. Thanks to Operation Exile, that's 5 years in the state pen. (Don't get me wrong - I agree 100% with Op. Exile when used against 'real' felons, not firearm-carrying citizens).

Oh yeah, add Australia, the UK, and several other countries that have banned and then confiscated firearms. I'm not afraid of the military, I'm afraid of the nutjobs in the legislative and executive branches that would turn the military against the citizenry.

You shouldn't have trusted your Sunday school teacher. Study for yourself! Obviously, you didn't check the information at the link I cited in my original message. The apparent contradiction you mention about Judas is shown to not be a contradiction after all.

Matthew 27:3

You proved the point I was making: study with the attitude that you're seeking to understand the Bible before you make bold statements about its veracity.

>Meanwhile, if you try to evaluate the Bible objectively by comparing it to what we know from history, archaeology, geology, etc., it is found often to be very, very wrong.

Back up your bold assertion with some facts! Come on - read a little archaeological history. Read about the Hittites. Before the 19th century, skeptics said that the Bible was wrong because the Bible mentioned Hittites, and yet they weren't found in archaelogical history. Years later, their existence was discovered and the critics ate crow. Google for it, or read "The Discovery of the Hittites" at this page.

Archaeology and the Old Testament

In the case of Bigbee v. Pacific Telephone, an intoxicated driver lost control of her car, veered off the road, jumped a curb, crossed the sidewalk, went into a parking lot, and hit a man standing in a telephone booth fifteen feet from the road. It is not surprising that the man in the phone booth filed a lawsuit. What is surprising, though, is that he sued the company responsible for the design and installation of the phone booth.

Although the lower court tossed out the case, liberal California Supreme Court Justice Rose Bird ruled against the phone company. She ruled that the risk that someone might veer off the road and crash into the telephone booth was foreseeable, therefore a jury could hold the company liable. Furthermore, she found of no consequence that the harm to the plaintiff came about because the driver was intoxicated.

how did those huge silt deposits, consisting of material compatible with that missing from the Canyon, get to be heaped up downstream of it?

Sediments usually do heap up downstream of where they were eroded.

Here some articles that might interest you. Global Warming
The Scientific Case against the Global Climate Treaty

Mainstream Christianity considers Jehovah's Witnesses to be a cult. Probe Ministries has this page as well as this page which discuss the discrepencies in Johovah's Witnesses's theology. You might want to consider asking a JW who visits to explain these issues. Both parties would come to a better understanding of each other. I do feel it is better to build bridges than destroy them.

Mainstream Christianity considers Jehovah's Witnesses to be a cult. Probe Ministries has this page as well as this page which discuss the discrepencies in Johovah's Witnesses's theology. You might want to consider asking a JW who visits to explain these issues. Both parties would come to a better understanding of each other. I do feel it is better to build bridges than destroy them.

Mainstream Christianity considers Jehovah's Witnesses to be a cult. Probe Ministries has this page as well as this page which discuss the discrepencies in Johovah's Witnesses's theology. You might want to consider asking a JW who visits to explain these issues. Both parties would come to a better understanding of each other. I do feel it is better to build bridges than destroy them.