Originally posted by FreakyKBH
As I said, the world is full of charlatans!

What I'm saying is that Christianity is not a bunch of ditto-heads, wherein God's just looking for folks to chime in "Me, too!" Such a state would be an affront to autonomy, which is the basis of this whole lesson. Christianity does not make the salvific issue acceptance of some iconic event/person. It do ...[text shortened]... u face the truth, gamble it all on you and your abilities, or do exchange your work for His?

Clear.
I create my own truth -truth is empty- and I keep myself responsible in full for my actions. Even if I had, like you, the blind indoctrinated belief that the entity you name "God" is existent and that your God acts the way he is presented to act in the scriptures you accept as "holy", I would still live and behave the way I do;

No religion😵

Originally posted by whodey
So how has abiogenesis undergone the scientific method? How have you questioned it using your critical thinking skills? In fact, sense you don't believe in God, you are required to believe this theory. In short, you have no choice.

When i say i don't belive in God, you first of all have to define what God is. I certainly don't believe in your Judeo-Christian hellfire and brimstone God.

As for abiogenesis, here's how my rational thoughts work. Firstly i accept the theory of evolution, i do so not because i have been taught it, the topic wasn't covered when i was at school (as far as i can remember). But because as an adult i wanted to understand the subject better. So i've bought books, taken books from the library, read articles and a few journals online all on evolution.

Evolutionary theory states that all life has a common ancestor. We know since the decoding of DNA the building blocks needed for life. The next question is how did these building blocks come together? The Miller–Urey experiment from the 50's demonstrated that organic compounds and amino acids could be created from inorganic precursors, and RNA replication has now been achieved in the lab. We know they all came together somehow, otherwise i wouldn't be here having this converstaion with you. At the moment that part is missing.

Now you may 'know' that god was involved here, i remain open minded. I see no need for God, but i don't rule out the possibility. That is the difference between you and me.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Golly, teach me some o' dat learnin' you got, there, mister.

Here's the definition of indoctrination which you provided a scant few minutes ago...

Indoctrination is the process of inculcating ideas, attitudes, cognitive strategies or a professional methodology.It is often distinguished from education by the fact that the indoctrinated person is ex ...[text shortened]... in, it is an activity with stated goals, not the natural process you gloss it over to be.

That may well be the case, but i don't see how, as you put it, a few scientists can be held up as an example of all. I'm sure there are more than a few paedophile Christians, it would be unfair for me to label all Christians with that tag.

But i still fail to see what this has to do with indoctrination?!

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Do you accept your Christian beliefs could be wrong?[/b]

People rarely accept anything soley on the basis of indoctrination. We all have "evidences" for what we believe and why. For example, who here believes in pink frogs the size of a truck? No one does. Why? Because there is no evidence for their existence. Now if you had a group of people out there claiming they have evidence for their existence, perhaps a few would buy into it, however, just as a witness is used in court such testimony is evidence even though it may be flemsy evidence. At best indocrination is accepting only one piece of evidence for believing something.

As for my Christian faith, it is about one premise which is God is love. Christ was correct. Love is the beginning of the law and the end of the law even for those who hate us. In addtion, love is the primary driving force in our lives that give our life meaning. The lack of love is what is at the heart of our ills in this world.

Of course, from a scientific view, love is not measurable and in and of itself does not exist. Nevertheless, it does exist from our perspective. As a result, science is for the most part useless to study this phenomenon just as religion is useless in studying the material world. However, since such phenomenon are so acutely vital to our existence it needs to be pursed and better understood.

Originally posted by whodey
People rarely accept anything soley on the basis of indoctrination. We all have "evidences" for what we believe and why. For example, who here believes in pink frogs the size of a truck? No one does. Why? Because there is no evidence for their existence. Now if you had a group of people out there claiming they have evidence for their existence, perhaps ...[text shortened]... phenomenon are so acutely vital to our existence it needs to be pursed and better understood.

At best indocrination is accepting only one piece of evidence for believing something.

No it isn't. If you question or critically examine that piece of evidence how can that be indoctrination? Indoctrination is being taught something without questioning or critically examing the evidence.

As a result, science is for the most part useless to study this phenomenon just as religion is useless in studying the material world.

I disagree. Everything in nature can be explained by studying nature. As Theodosius Dobzhansky said (who incidentally was devout Christian)-

'Nothing in biology makes sense except in light of evolution'

May i suggest you read some books on evolutionary psychology. Also i see you didn't answer my question. Do you accept your Christian beliefs could be wrong?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
That may well be the case, but i don't see how, as you put it, a few scientists can be held up as an example of all. I'm sure there are more than a few paedophile Christians, it would be unfair for me to label all Christians with that tag.

But i still fail to see what this has to do with indoctrination?!

When those few hold the keys to the castle, their pull outweighs the sum of their numbers. One excellent example of this phenomenon is the non-debate about global warming and its meaning, causes and cures. My kids have been so indoctrinated by the idea from all angles (school, age-aimed books, cartoons, movies, etc.) they're afraid to pass gas.

Anyone who merely skims across the surface of the media is likely in the same boat, whereas those who elect to dig a bit deeper are able to get a more clear picture of the situation. The point, of course, is that the number of people who control the message isn't nearly as important as the success of their efforts.

The few scientists seen as leaders in their fields, constantly quoted by the media, have done a fantastic job in controlling the message... and the message ain't necessarily so.

Originally posted by black beetle
No need to "love your enemy" per se. The point is to really see your own self in your enemy's eyes and, in a given case, to act according to your own evaluation. Your final action regarding your enemy should be irrelevant to your feeling of love alone, to your feeling of hate alone etc. It should be merely relevant to the evaluation of your own mind -an ...[text shortened]... to respect your enemy as much as you respect your own self and as much as you respect life😵

Indeed.
Other than that, I was just calling a spade a spade.
Anyone is free to challenge my evaluation 😵

Originally posted by black beetle
No need to "love your enemy" per se. The point is to really see your own self in your enemy's eyes and, in a given case, to act according to your own evaluation. Your final action regarding your enemy should be irrelevant to your feeling of love alone, to your feeling of hate alone etc. It should be merely relevant to the evaluation of your own mind -an ...[text shortened]... to respect your enemy as much as you respect your own self and as much as you respect life😵

I dont think I have any enemies anyway...hmmm. I'll think about it more....

Originally posted by karoly aczel
I dont think I have any enemies anyway...hmmm. I'll think about it more....

The "enemy" could be whatever and anybody; for example, a bushi had two kind of enemies: his own self, and his ordinary enemies. In the context of the known "love your enemy", the enemy was supposed to be a person or a whole tribe that under "normal" circumstances was worth of at least an attack.

My main "enemy" is my own personality whenever my mind hi-jacks me; however I consider "enemy" too any person that unprovoked attacks me by any means (a wannabe robber, an employer who systematically pays me not on time for a long period, a driver that is talking to his cell phone whilst driving, a person who throws his cigarette in a forest, a depraved cop/ politician etc). I could also consider "enemy" a whole goverment: for example, methinks the goverment of the Republic of Armenia is quite justified when it holds Ankara fully responsible for the genocide of the Armenian people

😵

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
When those few hold the keys to the castle, their pull outweighs the sum of their numbers. One excellent example of this phenomenon is the non-debate about global warming and its meaning, causes and cures. My kids have been so indoctrinated by the idea from all angles (school, age-aimed books, cartoons, movies, etc.) they're afraid to pass gas.

Anyone ...[text shortened]... have done a fantastic job in controlling the message... and the message ain't necessarily so.

A ha, another Christian American 'man-made global warming' sceptic, no doubt leaning towards the right in your politics also.

Personally i know little about the subject other then the earth is warming, are mans actions responsible or not? A large bulk of scientists say yes, some say no. After reading a few threads in the Debates forum, the American Christian Right seem to think there is some sort of conspiracy involving scientists, the media, the left and government to try and curtail capitalism and instill some sort of socialist/communist power in it's place. Highly amusing.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
A ha, another Christian American 'man-made global warming' sceptic, no doubt leaning towards the right in your politics also.

Personally i know little about the subject other then the earth is warming, are mans actions responsible or not? A large bulk of scientists say yes, some say no. After reading a few threads in the Debates forum, the American Ch ...[text shortened]... capitalism and instill some sort of socialist/communist power in it's place. Highly amusing.

Man made or not , it doesn't take a genius to figure out that we need cleaner scouces of power in the future, to enjoy healthy lives. Maybe to enjoy any sort of life.

Originally posted by black beetle
[b]Clear.
I create my own truth -truth is empty-

IF I create my own truth, truth is empty. 😉

Originally posted by Proper Knob

No it isn't. If you question or critically examine that piece of evidence how can that be indoctrination? Indoctrination is being taught something without questioning or critically examing the evidence.

[

My point here is that you are sizing up the individual that is telling you something. Do you trust them? Do they have a good track record of being reliatble etc. So yes, it is evidence just as testimony would be in a court of law.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
I disagree. Everything in nature can be explained by studying nature. As Theodosius Dobzhansky said (who incidentally was devout Christian)-

'Nothing in biology makes sense except in light of evolution'

Explain love scientifically. Sure you can clumsly say it is a set of complex reactions in the brain, but so what? How is that relavent to me? In fact, how is science relative to me? Sure, science may find ways to make us live a little longer or better etc, but the bottom line is that it is for the most part like playing trivial pursuit. What really matters to us are relationships with our fellow human beings and/or our Maker. It is the study of these relationships and the love shared therin that is what matters to us. In contrast, I could spend my entire life studying science but live an unfulfilled and relatively empty life without loving relationships.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
[ Do you accept your Christian beliefs could be wrong?[/b]

Yes. Some of them I have discovered were wrong. In fact, no one has all the answers. The question is what do you place your faith in? Is it your own logic that has shown itself flawed or science that has been flawed at times or is it in a higher power you believe is not flawed? When I study Christ's teachings I am presented with perfection. It is I who need such perfection and am continually in pursuit of it.