Should evolution be taught in high sc...

Should evolution be taught in high school?

There are 180363 comments on the www.scientificblogging.com story from Feb 24, 2008, titled Should evolution be taught in high school?. In it, www.scientificblogging.com reports that:

Microbiologist Carl Woese is well known as an iconoclast. At 79 years of age, Woese is still shaking things up. Most recently, he stated in an interview with Wired that...

"My feeling is that evolution shouldn't be taught at the lower grades. You don't teach quantum mechanics in the grade schools. One has to be quite educated to work with these concepts; what they pass on as evolution in high schools is nothing but repetitious tripe that teachers don't understand."

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.scientificblogging.com.

russell

Salisbury, Australia

#126831 Apr 13, 2013
PART 3

Yet the geographical work of Agrippa and the preparation of a breviarium totius imperil by Augustus (Tac. Ann. i.11; Suet. Aug. 28 and 101; Dio Cassius liii.30; lvi.33; compare Mommsen, Staatsrecht, II, 1025, note 3), together with the interest of the emperor in the organization and finances of the empire and the attention which he gave to the provinces (Marquardt, Rom. Staatsverwaltung, II, 211; compare 217), are indirectly corroborative of Luke's statement. Augustus himself conducted a census in Italy in 726/28, 746/8, 767/14 (Mommsen, Res Ges., 34) and in Gaul in 727/27 (Dio Cassius liii.22, 5; Livy Epit. cxxxiv) and had a census taken in other provinces (Pauly-Wissowa, Realencyc., under the word "Census," 1918; Marquardt, op. cit., II, 213). For Egypt there is evidence of a regular p eriodic census every 14 years extending back to 773/20 (Ramsay, op. cit., 131 if; Grenfell and Hunt, Oxy. Papyri, II, 207; Wilcken, Griech. Ostraka, I, 444) and it is not improbable that this procedure was introduced by Augustus (Schurer, op. cit., I, 515). The inference from Egyptian to similar conditions in other provinces must indeed be made cautiously (Wilcken, op. cit., 449; Marquardt, op. cit., 441); yet in Syria the regular tributum capitis seems to imply some such preliminary work (Dig, 1. 15, 3; Appian, Syriac., 50; Marquardt, op. cit., II, 200, note 2; Pauly-Wissowa, op. cit., 1921; Ramsay, op. cit., 154). The time of the decree is stated only in general terms by Luke, and it may have been as early as 727/27 (Zumpt, op. cit., 159; Marquardt, op. cit., II, 212) or later in 746-8 (Huschke, Census, 34; Ramsay, op. cit., 158), its execution in different provinces and subject kingdoms being carried out at different times. Hence, Luke dates the census in the kingdom of Herod specifically by connecting it with the administrative functions of Quirinius in Syria. But as P. Quintilius Varus was the legate of Syria just before and after the death of Herod from 748/6-750/4 (Ant., XVII, v, 2; XVII, ix., 3; XVII, x, 1 and 9; XVII, xi, 1; Tac. Hist. v.9; and coins in Eckhel, Doctr. num. vet., III, 275) and his predecessor Was C. Sentius Saturninus from 745/9-748/6 (Ant; XVI, ix, 1; x, 8; xi, 3; XVII, i, 1; ii, 1; iii, 2), there seems to be no place for Quirinius during the closing years of Herod's reign. Tertullian indeed speaks of Saturninus as legate at the time of Jesus' birth (Adv. Marc., iv.9). The interpretation of Luke's statement as indicating a date for the census before Quirinius was legate (Wieseler, Chron. Syn., 116; Lagrange, Revue Biblique, 1911, 80) is inadmissible. It is possible that the connection of the census with Quirinius may be due to his having brought to completion what was begun by one of his predecessors; or Quirinius may have been commissioned especially by the emperor as legatus ad census accipiendos to conduct a census in Syria and this commission may have been connected temporally with his campaign against the Homonadenses in Cilicia (Tac. Ann. iii.48; compare Noris, Cenotaph. Pis., 320; Sanclemente, op. cit., 426 passim; Ramsay, op. cit., 238). It has also been suggested by Bour (L'Inscription de Quirinius, 48) that Quirinius may have been an imperial procurator specially charged with authority in the matter of the Herodian census. The titulus Tiburtinus (CIL, XIV, 3613; Dessau, Inscr. Latin Sel., 918)--if rightly assigned to him--and there seems to be no sufficient reason for questioning the conclusiveness of Mommsen's defense of this attribution (compare Liebenam, Verwaltungsgesch., 365)--proves that he was twice legate of Syria, and the titulus Venetus (CIL, III, 6687; Dessau, op. cit., 2683) gives evidence of a census conducted by him in Syria.
russell

Salisbury, Australia

#126832 Apr 13, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
The Pentateuch was supposedly the writing of Moses and he supposedly lived around 1400+- BC. Most mainline Christian scholars now believe that the Pentateuch was written by 4 different authors around 700 to 500 BC.
http://creation.com/debunking-the-documentary...

http://creation.com/did-moses-really-write-ge...
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
So the written Hebrew mythology started at this point...not around 1400+- BC
Of course the Garden of Eden was first mentioned in Genesis which is the first chapter of the Pentateuch. The myths never give a date for any of the happenings in the Pentateuch....men in MUCH later times estimated the dates by following genealogies listed in the book
And...?

Have you come across Bishop Ussher in your non-readings....?

http://creation.com/bible-precision-date-of-c...
russell

Salisbury, Australia

#126833 Apr 13, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
More of the same.
If you can't do better than this nonsense then give it up.
No response to the rest.
Try giving your best shot.
I am bored again.
>Truncated<

Give it up, Dogem

Things are perfectly clear

You're no Christian, Bud

And Buddhism is a failure

1) No God in Buddhism

Buddha rejected the existence of all gods and spiritual beings. Buddhism thus denies the Christian concept of a Supreme Spiritual Being outside of His creation who brought all things into existence. Buddhists begin with the presupposition that there is no Divine Authority to direct their conduct or to whom they are accountable now or in any future life.

2) No non-material part of man survives physical death

The Dalai Lama writes:

“In Buddhism there is no recognition of something like the soul which is unique to humans. From the perspective of consciousness, the difference between humans and animals is a matter of degree and not of kind.”18

Christians believe that because we are all “made in the image of God”, we have a spiritual dimension, i.e. a capacity for holding spiritual communion with God through prayer, praise, and worship. Furthermore this is a permanent essence or immortal part of man that survives death; it is sometimes called the “soul”(Matthew 10:28); cf. Revelation 6:9 where the martyred disembodied dead in heaven are called “souls”. And Jesus said:“For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul”(Mark 8:36).

3. No sin against God

Sin, as rebellion against a holy God, or as transgression of divine law(s), is not recognized in Buddhism. Buddhists have many numerical lists of things to do or not do, but these tend to be regarded more as counsel than as commandments. For example, one of Buddha’s Five Precepts for laymen is “Do not take intoxicants.”20 Thus under Buddhist philosophy, if you do drink alcohol or use drugs, you are just making it harder for yourself to become enlightened. Equally, sexual misconduct is not a sin in the sense of breaking a God-given commandment.

4. No Saviour

In Buddhism, there is no Saviour. The only salvation is through self-help, following the ‘Noble Eightfold Path’ until you become a buddha, i.e. you pass out of the wheel of life and enter nirvana. Buddhists deny the deity of Jesus Christ, and hence that His death on the cross was the perfect sacrifice and atonement for our sins.

5. No creation—either of life or of the universe
(a) Of Life

In his book The Universe in a Single Atom the Dalai Lama devotes the whole of Chapter Five to discussing the theory of evolution. As this concept is not a threat to any Buddhist scriptures, nor yet to the Buddhist religion, and certainly not to Buddhist atheism, his conclusions are very pertinent and obviously he cannot be accused of having a creationist bias.

He notes that Darwinian evolution does not explain the origin of life, that it is not even a testable theory by Karl Popper’s definition (see creation.com/its-not-science ), that survival of the fittest is a tautology, that the struggle for existence through aggression and competition does not explain altruism and compassion, and that the Darwinian account of the origin of life does not explain the origin of sentience (i.e. conscious beings who have the capacity to experience pain and pleasure).22

NO HOPE IN BUDDHISM

For Buddhists, the future means innumerable rebirths, with the forlorn hope of perhaps achieving nirvana—something like total annihilation—at absolute best. Not much of a future!

For Christians, the future means hope—a hope that is certain.
http://creation.com/reincarnation-vs-creation
http://creation.com/buddhism

And just for fun-->

http://creation.com/the-virginal-conception-o...

----------

By the way
Isn't it interesting how the most boring people are usually the most bored?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#126835 Apr 13, 2013
Russell, I am not going to read a nonsensical wall of text of yours.

Once again, the only census in Roman records was the Census of Qurinus. Jesus would have been about 11 at the time of it.

The nativity story of Luke is busted. Also the claim that people would have had to go to their ancestral homes for a census has also been busted by experts.

So that was a doubly falsified claim.

We know that you are an idiot for anything written in your book of myth. It looks like the writers of it did not have the best of memories and tried to find reasonable excuses for the mythological parts of their stories.
russell

Salisbury, Australia

#126836 Apr 13, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
And here's where you lose your humanity. The premise that an entire society or race should ever be eradicated, down to the infants, is prima facie immoral in the secular world. Only religion could convince anybody that murdering one person is wrong but murdering an entire people is justifiable. You are a prime example of how religion can get good people to do horrible things.
In 2008, approximately 1.21 million abortions took place in the U.S., down from an estimated 1.29 million in 2002, 1.31 million in 2000 and 1.36 million in 1996. From 1973 through 2008, nearly 50 million legal abortions have occurred in the U.S.(AGI).

In 2009, the highest number of reported abortions occurred in New York (119,996), Florida (81,918) and Texas (77,630); the fewest occurred in Wyoming (&#8804;20), South Dakota (769) and North Dakota (1,290)(CDC).

The 2009 abortion ratios by state ranged from a low of 57 abortions per 1,000 live births in Mississippi (Wyoming had too few abortions for reliable tabulation) to a high of 713 abortions per 1,000 live births in NYC (CDC).

The annual number of legal induced abortions in the United States doubled between 1973 and 1979, and peaked in 1990. There was a slow but steady decline through the 1990's. Overall, the number of annual abortions decreased by 6% between 2000 and 2009, with temporary spikes in 2002 and 2006 (CDC).

The US abortion rate is similar to those of Australia, New Zealand, and Sweden but higher than those of other Western European countries (NAF).

In 1998, the last year for which estimates were made, more than 23% of legal induced abortions were performed in California (CDC).

In 2005, the abortion rate in the United States was higher than recent rates reported for Canada and Western European countries and lower than rates reported for China, Cuba, the majority of Eastern European countries, and certain Newly Independent States of the former Soviet Union (CDC).

Nearly half of pregnancies among American women are unintended; about 4 in 10 of these are terminated by abortion. Twenty-two percent of all U.S. pregnancies end in abortion.(AGI).

----------
Are you for or against abortion?

----------

Here's an abortion clock

http://www.numberofabortions.com/

This is the result of YOUR world view

Not mine

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#126837 Apr 13, 2013
Russell, can you find a reliable source that supports your claims?

Of course not. That is why you have to go to incredibly biased Christian sites and creatard sources.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#126838 Apr 13, 2013
Russell, are you pro or anti sexual eduction? Proper sex education would of course include instruction on how to use various forms of birth control, so yea or nay on sex ed?
russell

Salisbury, Australia

#126839 Apr 13, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
Russell, are you pro or anti sexual eduction? Proper sex education would of course include instruction on how to use various forms of birth control, so yea or nay on sex ed?
Yea

Sex education is important

Why even question that?

Abortion is not a form of birth control

It is the killing of a human

THAT is genocide of horrific proportions

AND the direct result of your God-less philosophy of choice

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Evolution is true.....

#126840 Apr 13, 2013
russell wrote:
<quoted text>
http://creation.com/debunking-the-documentary...
http://creation.com/did-moses-really-write-ge...
<quoted text>
And...?
Have you come across Bishop Ussher in your non-readings....?
http://creation.com/bible-precision-date-of-c...
Russel I came across the Ussher-Lightfoot chronologies in 1958. Where were you then?

Gee, Russel, I'm sorry you had to revert to junk religious sources who don't know what they are talking about. They seem to be dedicated to spreading the same old trash without any REAL evidence.

Most of the Pentateuch is a lie. We can and have proven that from multiple lines of evidence. Kiss Moses and Adam and Eve goodbye.
russell

Salisbury, Australia

#126841 Apr 13, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Then allow me to explain.
You claim Jesus IS God. Its your religion's way of getting around the awkward issue of claiming to be monotheistic while obviously espousing two Gods, a Senior Father God and a Junior Son God.
Actually
Its a Triune Godhead

How did you not know that?

I am beyond shocked
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
So you say, its really one person and GOD came to Earth in human form.
Then you have the awkward situation where Jesus quotations have him talking about GOD in the third person. In logical terms, that requires two entities, not one.
And then Jesus asks God why God has forsaken him....
Now, God might be mighty big and strong and powerful, but how can HE forsake HIMSELF and even ASK HIMSELF why he is FORSAKING HIMSELF?
You wonder how I can fail to understand that? I think its pretty obvious. Perhaps I should quote Infinite Force's Law of Non-contradiction about now...
Failing to understand is universal
In itself, this is not failure

Radiated heat from the sun can not exist without the sun

One is derived from the other

I hate doing the following

But this is what I am reduced to on this forum

Ice, water and water vapour

One and the same

--------

Nothing would do in place of perfection

Only God Himself could provide the perfection and purity required of the Lamb that was to take away the sin of the world

The issue of forsaking Himself is easily understood by the fact that God and sin can not be present together

----------

russell wrote:
Your geologic column and your evolutionary beliefs lie in tatters
They are unsupported by any evidence
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
We cannot continue to have a one sided conversation where I ask you to read a source, you refuse to read it, and then you continue to claim that I have presented no evidence.

Again, this simply makes you a liar.

Here it is again Russell. You either have the balls to read it and reject its claims, or STFU.

http://www.noanswersingenesis.org.au/geologic ...

And no, a one pager from a creationist site that does NOT deal with the evidence itself is NOT a refutation.

Same goes for YOU URBAN COWBOY.
This article on noanswers was written in 1995- 1996 against creationist geology
It has been debunked

Read the article that I had linked

Here it is again

It is finely written and you will not be disappointed

http://creation.com/does-geologic-column-exis...

----------

russell wrote:
<quoted text>

KNOW YOUR BIBLE
Know the meaning of what has been described
It was essential that the Israelis adhered to the rules that He ordained
They needed to be the nation genetically and spiritually from which the Messiah was to emerge
How would you have maintained the strength, genetic and spiritual purity required by God of a nation such as extracted from Egypt by Moses under God's direction?
THINK Chimney
THINK
They were in the dessert for 40 years
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
No, YOU think for a change. Get under the bonnet instead of telling me why the car is blue.

All the preconditions you describe are ALREADY highly contingent and unnecessary. For example, why would God NEED a "genetically pure" Messiah etc? Its already arbitrary.

Face it. You have to back-fill all kinds of ridiculous bullshit reasons so that your story makes sense.

However, if "genetic purity" requiring genocide is called for by God, as it explicitly is in the Bible, then your religion is morally equivalent to Nazism.
To what genocide do you refer?

----------

Please see my post # 126836

Here's the abortion clock again

http://www.numberofabortions.com/

That's the result of YOUR belief system.....

..........not sanctioned by my God

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#126842 Apr 14, 2013
russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Yea
Sex education is important
Why even question that?
Abortion is not a form of birth control
It is the killing of a human
THAT is genocide of horrific proportions
AND the direct result of your God-less philosophy of choice
Half right, sex education is important.

When a fetus becomes a human is highly questionable. Even the Bible is not clear on that. In the old eye for an eye old testament someone who induced an abortion through violence only had to pay a fine for his crime. It seems that they did not think that abortion was murder.
russell

Salisbury, Australia

#126843 Apr 14, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
Russel I came across the Ussher-Lightfoot chronologies in 1958. Where were you then?
Unborn
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
Gee, Russel, I'm sorry you had to revert to junk religious sources who don't know what they are talking about. They seem to be dedicated to spreading the same old trash without any REAL evidence.
Most of the Pentateuch is a lie. We can and have proven that from multiple lines of evidence. Kiss Moses and Adam and Eve goodbye.
No

You are quite wrong

By the way.....who is "we"?

I'm sorry, too, that you have not a leg to stand on....
And that you have adopted the same nonsensical views as gap theorists, theistic evolutionists and other dumbos

http://christianthinktank.com/aecy.html

http://christianthinktank.com/qmoses1.html

http://christianthinktank.com/aec2.html

http://christianthinktank.com/qjedp.html

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#126844 Apr 14, 2013
russell wrote:
And Buddhism is a failure
1) No God in Buddhism
2) No non-material part of man survives physical death
3. No sin against God
4. No Saviour
5. No creation—either of life or of the universe

-------
He notes that Darwinian evolution does not explain the origin of life, that it is not even a testable theory by Karl Popper’s definition (see creation.com/its-not-science ), that survival of the fittest is a tautology,
Well, you sold me. You have shown that Buddhism is superior to Christianity in every moral respect. Because its not a carrot and stick approach, but clearly by your own quotes, the realisation that virtue is its own reward.

As for the tired claim that evolution is tautological by Popper's standards, it rubbish. Even the phrase "survival of the fittest" is merely a shorthand for a process, a catchphrase not even invented by Darwin or appearing in his original book. Popper was initially fooled by it and creatards love to point this out, always omitting that after Popper understood the theory better, he realised this was not the case. Evolution is a fully falsifiable non-tautological scientific theory. If the Dalai Lama is just as ignorant on this point as you guys, I couldn't care less.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#126845 Apr 14, 2013
russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually
Its a Triune Godhead
How did you not know that?
....Ice, water and water vapour
One and the same
I am amazed that you can buy into these utterly feeble analogies.

There are clearly TWO separate and distinct entities required when Jesus utters "Why hast thou forsaken me?".

Its elementary logic. Your Triune blabbermouthing is the most transparent non-explanation for anything ever uttered by men.
The issue of forsaking Himself is easily understood by the fact that God and sin can not be present together
Its easily understood as an evasion of the point. Even if God forsook Himself, how come he had to ask himself why he was forsaking himself?

See, the reality is, you are crazy, and your fear and hope drive you to accept idiocy rather than face up to your own mortality as a human being.
russell wrote:
Your geologic column and your evolutionary beliefs lie in tatters
They are unsupported by any evidence
<quoted text>
This article on noanswers was written in 1995- 1996 against creationist geology
It has been debunked
Read the article that I had linked
Here it is again
It is finely written and you will not be disappointed
http://creation.com/does-geologic-column-exis...
I already read it and it does not even BEGIN to address the issues in the article I sent you that you are too cowardly to read.

I will note for the record, that you promised to read mine if I read yours. I did. You did not. You are a liar.

http://www.noanswersingenesis.org.au/geologic...
KNOW YOUR BIBLE
It was essential that the Israelis adhered to the rules that He ordained
They needed to be the nation genetically and spiritually from which the Messiah was to emerge

To what genocide do you refer?
The Midianites. Kill them all (except the yummy virgins).
----------
You support a God whose only solution was genocide. And you justify that. So you see no moral equivalence between this act and Nazism. You are blind.

A man of virtue would see that the representation of God as shown in the Bible by the Israelite myths cannot be accurate, and such a God has no moral authority. Transparent intellectual dishonesty driven by cowardice, no matter how you try to disguise it from yourself.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#126846 Apr 14, 2013
russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Yea
Sex education is important
Why even question that?
Abortion is not a form of birth control
It is the killing of a human
THAT is genocide of horrific proportions
AND the direct result of your God-less philosophy of choice
You blabber about genocide while arguing that its not only OK, its a moral imperative...if God orders it.

Yes, Midianites again.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#126847 Apr 14, 2013
russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Is genocide wrong?
Who says?
Neither you nor God, apparently.
russell

Salisbury, Australia

#126848 Apr 14, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Half right, sex education is important.
When a fetus becomes a human is highly questionable. Even the Bible is not clear on that. In the old eye for an eye old testament someone who induced an abortion through violence only had to pay a fine for his crime. It seems that they did not think that abortion was murder.
Nope

You are dead wrong

Human gametes produce a human conceptus

It does not 'become' human

It IS human

Your argument of not knowing when a fetus becomes human reeks of the ignorance of the Roe vs Wade era

Dust the cobwebs off, ole boy

-------

Psalm 139:13-16
New International Version (NIV)

13 For you created my inmost being;
you knit me together in my mother’s womb.

14 I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made;
your works are wonderful,
I know that full well.

15 My frame was not hidden from you
when I was made in the secret place,
when I was woven together in the depths of the earth.

16 Your eyes saw my unformed body;
all the days ordained for me were written in your book
before one of them came to be.

----------

Jeremiah 1:5

5 “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations.”

----------

Luke 1:41-44

41 And when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the baby leaped in her womb. And Elizabeth swas filled with the Holy Spirit,

42 and she exclaimed with a loud cry, t“Blessed are you among women, and ublessed is vthe fruit of your womb!

43 And why is this granted to me that the mother of my Lord should come to me?

44 For behold, when the sound of your greeting came to my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy.

----------

Abortion is murder as per the Bible --->willful taking of an innocent human life

Exodus 20:13 (ESV)

13 “You shall not murder.

-----for explanation that the basic meaning of the Hebrew 'ratsach' is killing in the manner of a predatory animal

http://www.tektonics.org/lp/nokilling.html

----------

Romans 13:9

9 For the commandments, y“You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet,” and any other commandment, are summed up in this word: z

----------You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”-------
russell

Salisbury, Australia

#126849 Apr 14, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
I am amazed that you can buy into these utterly feeble analogies.
There are clearly TWO separate and distinct entities required when Jesus utters "Why hast thou forsaken me?".
Its elementary logic. Your Triune blabbermouthing is the most transparent non-explanation for anything ever uttered by men.
<quoted text>
Its easily understood as an evasion of the point. Even if God forsook Himself, how come he had to ask himself why he was forsaking himself?
See, the reality is, you are crazy, and your fear and hope drive you to accept idiocy rather than face up to your own mortality as a human being.
<quoted text>
I already read it and it does not even BEGIN to address the issues in the article I sent you that you are too cowardly to read.
I will note for the record, that you promised to read mine if I read yours. I did. You did not. You are a liar.
http://www.noanswersingenesis.org.au/geologic...
<quoted text>
The Midianites. Kill them all (except the yummy virgins).
----------
You support a God whose only solution was genocide. And you justify that. So you see no moral equivalence between this act and Nazism. You are blind.
A man of virtue would see that the representation of God as shown in the Bible by the Israelite myths cannot be accurate, and such a God has no moral authority. Transparent intellectual dishonesty driven by cowardice, no matter how you try to disguise it from yourself.
God detests sin

One only need look at the Cross to see how much

The people groups surrounding Israel detested Yahweh Jehovah

They indulged in detestable practices

Read your Bible, Chimney

Perhaps you would have preferred that no Nazis were killed in WWI & II?

This entire planet is destined for destruction

Get your life jacket on

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#126850 Apr 14, 2013
russell wrote:
<quoted text>
God detests sin
One only need look at the Cross to see how much
The people groups surrounding Israel detested Yahweh Jehovah
They indulged in detestable practices
Read your Bible, Chimney
Perhaps you would have preferred that no Nazis were killed in WWI & II?
This entire planet is destined for destruction
Get your life jacket on
The people of Israel claimed that the surrounding tribes indulged in detestable practices. Hitler claimed the Jews indulged in detestable practices that were a threat to his own people too. Its no different. What is DETESTABLE in both cases is the use of that excuse to annihilate a whole people.

Group atrocities seem to require a mass reality distortion whereby the enemy is always de-humanised in some way - so that the normal restraints of moral behavior can be suspended.

The enemy is always detestable, is dirty, is impure in some way, or blood sucking or killing your babies or lusting after your folk or your lands....always portrayed as lacking decency thereby permitting or demanding the use of indecencies against it.

In Rwanda The Hutu called the Tutsis "cockroaches".

This is HUMAN behavior and only the depraved would attribute it to God. A God YOU claim made all the rules, and had an infinity of options no matter what. All He could manage was to goad the Israelites into genocide?

Yeah right. Think, Russell!

Whether there is a God or not, the reality is that the Israelites behaved exactly like any other tribe and OF COURSE attributed this behavior to a "command of God".

If the planet is destined for destruction, its because of people like you who can still be sucked in by this mechanism. The antidote is skepticism, not yet more failed dogma.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#126851 Apr 14, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
What was unreliable about the witnesses or the period?
For one, the actual "witnesses" didn't write anything down, they told someone else many years later to write it down. Records in that period were notoriously altered or modified to suite the the ruling regime, and until about a hundred years ago it was still like that. So an "all knowing" thing would know that would be the worst time to do anything and expect it to be preserved. Even ancient cultures knew information would change based on who was the victor, that's why many of them buried their historical records in the tombs of their kings. I mean if a primitive people like ancient Egypt knew they needed to go to extremes to preserve their history, you'd think that there'd be more than a bunch of hearsay and conjecture written on parchment from an "all knowing" being. Seriously, this isn't rocket science.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Evolution Debate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 3 min Into The Night 87,431
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... (Jun '17) 7 min Eagle 12 - 5,818
What's your religion? 2 hr Simon 771
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 3 hr Simon 166,351
Are Asians/whites more evolved? (Sep '07) 20 hr Tom Honda 1,825
Scientific Method Feb 15 stinky 20
Evolving A Maze Solving Robot Feb 6 Untangler 2
More from around the web