Don't dictate beliefs

Don't dictate beliefs

There are 11176 comments on the The Star Press story from Sep 5, 2012, titled Don't dictate beliefs. In it, The Star Press reports that:

No one else can say otherwise? That is basically saying those who do "believe in God" are better? Hardly.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Star Press.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#8845 Dec 19, 2012
Sambrotherofnephi wrote:
<quoted text>
Some of that has been mistranslated. See New Testament Manuel ( https://si.lds.org/bc/seminary/content/librar... ) Chapter 36 under question "Should women keep silent in church?"
See also chapter 42 under question "How Should a Wife "Submit" to Her Husband?" (clarifies that the word for "submit" in the Greek does NOT imply an inferiority)
Although I was just providing a small example, I very much doubt that the gratuitous sexism found throughout the Bible can be passed off as a mistranslation.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#8846 Dec 19, 2012
Sambrotherofnephi wrote:
<quoted text>
Scripture can be misinterpreted and taken out of context. The best evidence we can find regarding the condition of the woman in the church is from the testimonies of the women themselves.
This women was my internal relations professor:
http://mormonscholarstestify.org/1718/valerie...
In a similar way to passing the rampant sexism off as a mistranslation, I find it hard to concur with you that it's being taken out of context.

Men were in charge and women were not worthy of equal treatment.

You'd have thought that any cosmic mega-being would have done more to ensure gender equality.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#8847 Dec 19, 2012

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#8848 Dec 19, 2012
Thinking wrote:
You should check your posts, dishonest BSer.
<quoted text>
"Jewellery" - LOL - I'm afraid you have things backwards - you should be checking your own posts, you pathetic illiterate mongoloid.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#8849 Dec 19, 2012
An Atheist against Neo-Darwinistic Evolution

“I have been delighted with what I have read so far of Thomas Nagel’s Mind and Cosmos. As fully declared by the book’s subtitle–”Why the materialist neo-Darwinian conception of nature is almost certainly false”–Nagel takes the position that evolution (that is, the concept that life on earth is purely the result of natural selection acting on random variations) is simply not true and is insufficient as an explanation for what we see all around us. Going further, he points out that if there can be no materialist reduction life to simple, unguided action by unbiased physical and chemical laws, then there must be something in addition to those physical and chemical laws at work–something that is in some way goal-oriented.

Thomas Nagel is unquestionably an atheist and this makes his conclusions, I believe, all the more damaging to the materialist cause: He has no religious-based objection to evolution and is not interested in defending a deity of any sort.”
http://wallacegsmith.wordpress.com/2012/12/10...

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#8850 Dec 19, 2012
Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature Is Almost Certainly False, by Thomas Nagel

“The modern materialist approach to life has conspicuously failed to explain such central mind-related features of our world as consciousness, intentionality, meaning, and value. This failure to account for something so integral to nature as mind, argues philosopher Thomas Nagel, is a major problem, threatening to unravel the entire naturalistic world picture, extending to biology, evolutionary theory, and cosmology.

Since minds are features of biological systems that have developed through evolution, the standard materialist version of evolutionary biology is fundamentally incomplete. And the cosmological history that led to the origin of life and the coming into existence of the conditions for evolution cannot be a merely materialist history, either. An adequate conception of nature would have to explain the appearance in the universe of materially irreducible conscious minds, as such.

Nagel's skepticism is not based on religious belief or on a belief in any definite alternative. In Mind and Cosmos, he does suggest that if the materialist account is wrong, then principles of a different kind may also be at work in the history of nature, principles of the growth of order that are in their logical form teleological rather than mechanistic.

In spite of the great achievements of the physical sciences, reductive materialism is a world view ripe for displacement. Nagel shows that to recognize its limits is the first step in looking for alternatives, or at least in being open to their possibility.”
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0199919755

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#8852 Dec 19, 2012
WHY IS THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION NOT THE "BASIS OF BIOLOGY"?

“One claim that is frequently repeated by evolutionists is the lie that the theory of evolution is the basis of biology… Those who put forward this claim suggest that biology could not develop, or even exist, without the theory of evolution. This claim actually stems from a demagogy born out of despair. The philosopher Professor Arda Denkel, one of the foremost names in Turkish science, makes the following comment on this subject:

For instance, it is quite wrong to suggest that "Rejecting the theory of evolution means rejecting the biological and geological sciences and the discoveries of physics and chemistry." Because in order to make such an inference (here a modus tollens) there need to be some propositions regarding chemical, physical, geological and biological discoveries that imply the theory of evolution. However, the discoveries, or statements of them, do not imply the theory. Therefore, they do not prove it.”

continued at conclusion section:

In our day, there is no reason why science should remain tied to the theory of evolution. Science is based on observation and experimentation. Evolution, on the other hand, is a hypothesis regarding an unobservable past. Furthermore, the theory's claims and propositions have always been disproved by science and the laws of logic. Science will suffer no loss, of course, when this hypothesis is abandoned. The American biologist G. W. Harper has this to say on the subject:

It is frequently claimed that Darwinism is central to modern biology. On the contrary, if all references to Darwinism suddenly disappeared, biology would remain substantially unchanged… 24

In fact, quite to the contrary, science will progress in a much faster and healthier manner when it is freed from the insistence of a theory full of dogmatism, prejudice, nonsense, and fabrication.”
http://www.darwinismrefuted.com/20questions04...

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#8854 Dec 19, 2012
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
A failed mormon is a successful human.
"a successful human" - something you know nothing about.....

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#8855 Dec 19, 2012
Hey Derek any chance your off topic spam will have some proof for deities? If not it will all be ignored as usual.

Seriously gang when are you going to start reporting that forum clogging spambot?

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#8856 Dec 19, 2012
Sambrotherofnephi wrote:
<quoted text>
I think priority should be given to traditional married couples, and the law seems to be leaning that way in some states.
Why do you want to treat gay people less favourably than hetero people?

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#8857 Dec 19, 2012
Sambrotherofnephi wrote:
<quoted text>
I asked my wife if she felt oppressed....she laughed at me.
Biblical evidences placing women in high regard:
-In Christ's time women were expected to render only temporal service. Christ Taught Mary and Martha that women could also participate in spiritual work. He didn't just see them as servants, he invited them to be his disciples.
-In Christ's time women held church in their homes, and a woman named Phebe held an ecclesiastical position in her congregation.
For more information about the role of women in Christ's church see http://www.lds.org/relief-society/daughters-i... and download the book "Daughters of My Kingdom" in either PDF or MP3 formats.
In secular societies where religion has lost control, you'll find empowered women who are by and large treated equally to men.

A husband saying he is better than his wife at maths might well be a statement of fact.

A husband saying that he is the head of the family, that his wife does not have the same rights as he does, is unclean at certain times of the month, and if she has the temerity to have had a sex life before their marriage (or has otherwise lost her hymen) then he can have her killed....that would be chauvanism (at the very least).

All this makes perfect sense from a historical/cultural point of view.

It makes zero sense from the point of view that a loving god had anything to with the Bible.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#8858 Dec 19, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
"Proverbs 31:10
An excellent wife who can find? She is far more precious than jewels.
Faithful & Trustworthy
1 Timothy 3:11 Even so must their wives be grave, not slanderers, sober, faithful in all things.
Gracious & Honorable
Proverbs 11:16 A gracious woman gets honor, and violent men get riches.
Helpful
Genesis 2:18, 22-24 Then the LORD God said,“It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him.”… And the rib that the LORD God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man. Then the man said,“This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.” Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.
Kindhearted & Generous
Proverbs 31:20-21 She opens her hand to the poor and reaches out her hands to the needy. She is not afraid of snow for her household, for all her household are clothed in scarlet.
Proverbs 31:26 She opens her mouth with wisdom, and the teaching of kindness is on her tongue.
Titus 2:2-5 Older men are to be sober-minded, dignified, self-controlled, sound in faith, in love, and in steadfastness. Older women likewise are to be reverent in behavior, not slanderers or slaves to much wine. They are to teach what is good, and so train the young women to love their husbands and children, to be self-controlled, pure, working at home, kind, the word of God
Proverbs 14:1 The wisest of women builds her house, but folly with her own hands tears it down.
Beautiful Women in the Bible
Genesis 12:11, 14 When he was about to enter Egypt, he said to Sarai his wife,“I know that you are a woman beautiful in appearance … When Abram entered Egypt, the Egyptians saw that the woman was very beautiful.
Genesis 24:16 The young woman was very attractive in appearance, a maiden whom no man had known. She went down to the spring and filled her jar and came up.
Ruth 1:16-17 But Ruth said,“Do not urge me to leave you or to return from following you. For where you go I will go, and where you lodge I will lodge. Your people shall be my people, and your God my God. Where you die I will die, and there will I be buried. May the LORD do so to me and more also if anything but death parts me from you.”
Esther 2:7 He was bringing up Hadassah, that is Esther, the daughter of his uncle, for she had neither father nor mother. The young woman had a beautiful figure and was lovely to look at, and when her father and her mother died, Mordecai took her as his own daughter.
Song of Solomon 4:1 Behold, you are beautiful, my love, behold, you are beautiful! Your eyes are doves behind your veil. Your hair is like a flock of goats leaping down the slopes of Gilead."
I looked through your post to see whether there was anything in there which placed women as the equal of men.

There wasn't.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#8859 Dec 19, 2012
Reason Personified wrote:
<quoted text>Genesis 2:5. before any plant of the field was in the earth and before any herb of the field had grown. For the Lord God had not caused it to rain on the earth, and there was no man to till the ground
Man: field hand
Lol

There we have it - man was created to till the ground.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#8860 Dec 19, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
It's remarkable that you continue to offer arguments like this when you and I both know what your primary objection is.
We see this sort of thing all the time.

Tell a Christian that mutilating a baby's genitals is barbaric and they'll usually respond with some bunk about circumcision being healthful and hygienic.
Thinking

Leighton Buzzard, UK

#8861 Dec 19, 2012
Why?
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
"Jewellery" - LOL - I'm afraid you have things backwards - you should be checking your own posts, you pathetic illiterate mongoloid.
Thinking

Leighton Buzzard, UK

#8862 Dec 19, 2012
Dishonest BSer.
derek4 wrote:
Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature Is Almost Certainly False, by Thomas Nagel
“The modern materialist approach to life has conspicuously failed to explain such central mind-related features of our world as consciousness, intentionality, meaning, and value. This failure to account for something so integral to nature as mind, argues philosopher Thomas Nagel, is a major problem, threatening to unravel the entire naturalistic world picture, extending to biology, evolutionary theory, and cosmology.
Since minds are features of biological systems that have developed through evolution, the standard materialist version of evolutionary biology is fundamentally incomplete. And the cosmological history that led to the origin of life and the coming into existence of the conditions for evolution cannot be a merely materialist history, either. An adequate conception of nature would have to explain the appearance in the universe of materially irreducible conscious minds, as such.
Nagel's skepticism is not based on religious belief or on a belief in any definite alternative. In Mind and Cosmos, he does suggest that if the materialist account is wrong, then principles of a different kind may also be at work in the history of nature, principles of the growth of order that are in their logical form teleological rather than mechanistic.
In spite of the great achievements of the physical sciences, reductive materialism is a world view ripe for displacement. Nagel shows that to recognize its limits is the first step in looking for alternatives, or at least in being open to their possibility.”
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0199919755

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#8863 Dec 19, 2012
Givemeliberty wrote:
Hey Derek any chance your off topic spam will have some proof for deities? If not it will all be ignored as usual.
Seriously gang when are you going to start reporting that forum clogging spambot?
I have once already.

Here goes twice.

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

#8864 Dec 19, 2012
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
Lol
There we have it - man was created to till the ground.
God/Priest is hungry and lazy. The sheep will be taught to till and toil all to the enrichment of the gods liaisons.

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#8865 Dec 19, 2012
Givemeliberty wrote:
Hey Derek any chance your off topic spam will have some proof for deities? If not it will all be ignored as usual.

Seriously gang when are you going to start reporting that forum clogging spambot?
He's post are dead on target. I love seeing these posting being brought forth for all of us to see what atheists are hidden. All the crimes in the name of evolution.

You on the other hand show a total lack of being able to carry on any discussion on anything of importance.
In fact it's nice to see when you can string together 3 words that actual have any meaning at all.

An unlimited number of you placed in a room with an infinite amount of time all pounding away on type writers might never come up with anything worth reading. I give the odds to your relatives, monkeys coming up with better reading material.

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#8866 Dec 19, 2012
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>Why do you want to treat gay people less favourably than hetero people?
mar·riage\ˈmer-ij,ˈma-rij\
noun
1 a (1): the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law:

Gays can have a civil union with all the same rights as marriage. Just don't change the meaning of a word to fit your needs. Like you're trying to change the meaning of atheist to add to your congregation.

Khatru,
How did life start?
How did the first life live long enough to figure out how to reproduce?
Was the first life plant or animal?
How did it split to both plant and animal?
How could a stack of mutation create you? Oh never mind on that last question. We already know the answer.

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.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 min Endofdays 69,977
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 16 min Subduction Zone 30,113
News Tampa Teacher @LoraJane Hates Christians, Promo... 2 hr Eagle 12 437
News Atheism and cowardice (Nov '11) 15 hr Roy 12,673
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 17 hr yehoshooah adam 3,779
Evidence for God! (Oct '14) Wed superwilly 579
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) Tue Eagle 12 258,469
More from around the web