返回列表 發帖
原帖由 shutterbug 於 2009-1-6 21:53 發表

Both science and religion, both never came up with solid physical evidences about how the world came about, so who will you believe or you won't believe either?  In this case, how superior is the sci ...


It's the final time I am going to say this. I don't blindly 'believe' when it comes to finding out about the world around us. I will just say that in terms of genesis theories, the Big Bang theory is just another theory, along with a few other theory that the scientific community is advertising. They definately sounds pretty interesting, and all of them sounds like they are possible~ Who knows how the universe really came about? Why should I be concerned about it?
The theory of evolution seems pretty good in explaining how life came to it's shape as it is today, despite that there are still holes in the theory. Tho, I just don't see any other theory that explain things as well as this theory. But again, who knows how living things as it is today really came about?

What I really feel strongly for (maybe not so strong that I'll donate them money or anything LOL), is that I appreciate the scientists who actively try to find answers, or improve the accuracy and detail of the answers to these questions. On the flip side, I condemn entities that are trying to undermine these scientific efforts. Spreading propaganda of some relatively weakly supported theory as 'the one and only truth', in my opinion, is also one of the ways that undermines Scientific discovery.

As for the peace/joy/hope that many Christian, and believer in other religions find (not only Christian claims that they find peace/joy/hope, etc from their religions, you know?)... I am not denying the role of religion in the society (see post #140 for that). On the flip side again, I also see the possible danger that religions can bring to the society (see post #30 for that).

TOP

原帖由 shutterbug 於 2009-1-7 14:43 發表

I totally understood this.  I had that impression not only because Nam claimed that reading the Bible for 9 years.  Nam also said that she (am I right?) went to church.  9 years is not a short time f ...


I think it only reinforces how Nam does not believe in the religion because he actually studied the religion in attempt to find out for himself whether it is believable for him. This IMO is an objective attitude. A person that attempt to understand a POV even if in the end, he/she don't agree with the POV because of the understanding he gained from it is definately the complete opposite of what the word 'ignorant' is about. IMO that is a very mature attitude.

On the flip side, shutterbug have become very defensive on this post, to a point that he have not only attacked me, Nam and also attacked a lot of other people just for the sake of defending his believe. I think he owe a lot of people an apology. IMO this is exactly what a mature Christian, or a mature person conducting a conversation shouldn't do... It is what IMO, give Christians such a bad name. They just can't stand people who don't carry their view and can't stand people telling them why they don't carry their view.

TOP

原帖由 shutterbug 於 2009-1-7 15:56 發表

you better give good evidence of how I attack you guys rather than simply stating this claim.


I feel offended, isn't that sufficient to demand an apology? You brought my mom and dad on the table and making ridiculous claims about them. Isn't that more than offensive? I don't see why that was necassary to get your points across other than to personally attack people that merely want to share why they don't believe in certain things that you happened to do so.

TOP

Honestly, there is no point to continue replying to this post. The thread is not even a logical discussion anymore. It is just emotionally charged filled with personal attacks and accusation on both sides. Particularly, as I have stated before, people that are religious have a tendancy to be emotionally influenced, such that the ability to think logically is highly impaired. Would you bother to try to talk logic with someone who have just lost a loved one? They are highly emotional and their ability to reason is greatly discounted. The difference is that some people settle down after traumatic events and come to their senses. On the other hand, religious influence can last a life time. When a person cannot reason logically by putting their emotion aside, rational discussion simply cannot occur. aka, all BS.

Not interested in replying to a thread where conversations are emotionally charged instead of logically formed. I just hope that the people that have conducted personal attacks to admit their mistake. I'd expect at least that especially when Christians are supposed to be held at a much 'higher moral standard'.

[ 本帖最後由 BiscottiGelato 於 2009-1-7 20:07 編輯 ]

TOP

原帖由 shutterbug 於 2009-1-7 20:37 發表

Just because you feel offended is not sufficient to demand an apology my friend.  You must have good grounds.  What kind of ridiculous claims did I make about your parents?  I did not make fun of you ...


Why can't I demand an apology if I feel offended? It's up to your own perception and moral standard, perhaps things like arrogance might influence your judgement as to whether you want to give that apology tho. On the flip side, I can also say a lot of weird, but false claims as example about your mom/dad/gf/sister, etc. Do you really want me to do that tho?

I definately will apologize if you feel offended, even tho I have made no personal claim, hypothetical or not, about you personally. But if you do genuinely feel offended, I here apologize and want to clarify that they weren't attacks and nothign against you personally in any nature.

It seems tho, you as a representative of the Christian community is not as generous and objective in the way you conduct yourself however. Unfortunate, but it's exactly what this thread is about, and a perfect example also: 'How Christians conduct themselves to the rest of the non-Christian world'.

TOP

返回列表