Will creationists buy/play this game?

[John-SJ]

Biddles:

...and the faith I hold is generally accepted by millions of Christians. So what is your point? No matter how generally accepted a theory is, until proven, it is still accepted on *faith*. It just so happens that my faith is in a Person rather than an idea. To each his own, right?

John-Sj

[CormacMacArt]

To answer the question:

I will buy the game depending on how well I enjoy the demo.


As to faith over science(from a scientist who believes in the Biblical story of Creation): That is not a real choice (as those who have watched Voyager faithfully should know!). The question is: "Why do you choose to believe special creation of life on this planet, as opposed to the slow evolution of life over millions of years?" I can only answer for myself; I chose to believe the Person Who healed my insanity. I have no problems with other Christians who feel that God was working through evolution (C.S.Lewis comes to mind).

I have never seen any good come from arguing Creation vs. Evolution and I believe that is for one very good reason. Most of those who fervently believe in evolution and feel the need to argue against creation are Atheists and an Atheist has no choice but to believe in evolution.

[John-SJ]

Originally posted by SkeleTony69 on 01-05-2000 12:02 PM
We don't "label ourselves" anything.We simply examine evidence ,without bias,and then accept the truth...no matter how ugly or unpopular that truth might be....

SkeleTony69:
Don't fool yourself. The fact that you have rejected the existence of God (an athiest) is a bias in and of itself. ALL of us are biased in one direction or another. For one to say they are unbiased is about as logical as claiming to be non-human because you have no brothers or sisters.

John-SJ

[SkeleTony69]

Originally posted by Michael Jeszenka on 12-19-1999 10:09 PM
And after reading some comments in this thread, its amazing that atheists still label themselves as "free thinkers" with open minds.

We don't "label ourselves" anything.We simply examine evidence ,without bias,and then accept the truth...no matter how ugly or unpopular that truth might be.I would much rather,there were such things as gods and miracles and such,and especially an afterlife.But I can admit that such things contradict even the most rudamentary laws of the universe and I suspect deep down most creationists know this on some level(else why would the pope ride around in a bulletproof car?).

[SkeleTony69]

Originally posted by CormacMacArt on 01-05-2000 11:41 AM
To answer the question:

I will buy the game depending on how well I enjoy the demo.


As to faith over science(from a scientist who believes in the Biblical story of Creation): That is not a real choice (as those who have watched Voyager faithfully should know!). The question is: "Why do you choose to believe special creation of life on this planet, as opposed to the slow evolution of life over millions of years?" I can only answer for myself; I chose to believe the Person Who healed my insanity. I have no problems with other Christians who feel that God was working through evolution (C.S.Lewis comes to mind).

I have never seen any good come from arguing Creation vs. Evolution ...
Let's say you had to attend a wedding(or funeral or whatever) and your attendance was totally dependant on your recieveing accurate directions to the chapel.Now your best friend tells you to go north on I-90 and take the "Noah" exit,but your uncle argues that is all wrong and you need to go south and take the "Darwin" exit.The only/best way for you to figure out who is right(in this example) might be to let them debate the issue until one of them realises he was mistaken("oh yeah...,I must have been thinking of that other chapel").

and I believe that is for one very good reason. Most of those who fervently believe in evolution and feel the need to argue against creation are Atheists and an Atheist has no choice but to believe in evolution.

Actually we have many choices besides superstion and evolution,...but evolution remains the most probable explanation.


------------------
SkeleTony
"Science has always been the greatest benefactor to the survival and advancement of a species....religion and superstition are the adversaries of science"

[CormacMacArt]

SkeleTony69 - Don't be ridiculous! NO ONE "simply examine[s] evidence, without bias", at least no one on this planet. Everyone has an agenda, and they see the world through that agenda.

OK - what else do you have to choose if you don't want/like/believe evolution?

As to your signature; I suggest that you do some reading on Sir Isaac Newton. Take a good look at the assumptions that he made when formulating his theory of gravity and where he got those assumptions.


P.S. - I don't know what happened, but my post, as it is quoted in your most recent post, seems to be merged with another post.
[This message has been edited by CormacMacArt (edited January 05, 2000).]

[SkeleTony69]

Originally posted by CormacMacArt on 01-05-2000 12:52 PM
SkeleTony69 - Don't be ridiculous! NO ONE "simply examine[s] evidence, without bias", at least no one on this planet. Everyone has an agenda, and they see the world through that agenda.

OK - what else do you have to choose if you don't want/like/believe evolution?

So if you were introduced to two men,whom you never met before,and told that one of them was a thief,you could pick out the culprit?Of course not.You would (I hope) require more information before you made that decision.I believe an atheist would go further,and question whether even one of them was a thief.

As to your signature; I suggest that you do some reading on Sir Isaac Newton. Take a good look at the assumptions that he made when formulating his theory of gravity and where he got those assumptions.

And I suggest you do some reading about copernicus and also the "Dark ages".Do you realise the first steam engine was built in B.C.?The inventor's "laboratory"(they weren't called that back then) was trashed by religious fanatics.If there had never been periods of "religious revitalism" (the dark ages,the witch hunts etc.)we may have found the cure for cancer,or any number of scientific advances which remain in the realm of sci-fi by now.


P.S. - I don't know what happened, but my post, as it is quoted in your most recent post, seems to be merged with another post.
[This message has been edited by CormacMacArt (edited January 05, 2000).]

I don't know either.



------------------
SkeleTony
"Science has always been the greatest benefactor to the survival and advancement of a species....religion and superstition are the adversaries of science"

[CormacMacArt]

SkeleTony69 - I didn't realize that you have been responding to my posts inside of what is labeled my "quote".

First -

Quote #1:
Let's say you had to attend a wedding(or funeral or whatever)and your attendance was totally dependant on your recieveing accurate directions to the chapel.Now your best friend tells you to go north on I-90 and take the "Noah" exit,but your uncle argues that is all wrong and you need to go south and take the "Darwin" exit.The only/best way for you to figure out who is right(in this example) might be to let them debate the issue until one of them realises he was mistaken("oh yeah...,I must have been thinking of that other chapel").

Responce: I am NOT minimizing the importance of truth. I am pointing out the futility of attempting to convince an atheist that a god (which he/she does not even believe exits) created life more or less as it is today. It is like trying to build a house and starting with the roof.

Quote #2:
And I suggest you do some reading about copernicus and also the "Dark ages".Do you realise the first steam engine was built in B.C.?The inventor's "laboratory"(they weren't called that back then) was trashed by religious fanatics.If there had never been periods of "religious revitalism" (the dark ages,the witch hunts etc.)we may have found the cure for cancer,or any number of scientific advances which remain in the realm of sci-fi by now.

Responce: This is what is called "evasion". You have not responded to what I said, but simply added more data to the argument. The FACT is that if Newton had been a Muslum, Hindu or an Atheist, he would not have made the following assumptions:
1. The universe is governed by Laws and is not random
2. Those Laws are UNIVERSAL in scope
3. Those Laws are apprehendable by humans
Sir Isaac Newton made those ASSUMPTIONS because he believed in the God described in the Bible and knew that it was in the nature of that God to create a universe where those three assumptions would be true.

I was never denying the negative aspect of those who call themselves religious. Hitler himself (an Atheist), used the pretence of religion in his attempt at genocide.

Second -

What other choice is open to an Atheist other than evolution (Even if it happened on another planet and seeded this one)?

[Pythagoras]

I dont see what the point is yall, you arent gonna change anyone's mind about creationism or evolution, you're just making each other more pissed, so why not just give up? Live and let live... Unless anyone can actually say that their mind has been changed through hearing an argument...

[Pintello]

Hi CormacMacArt,

I came to the same conclusion you have back when these forums were first openned and similar debates were going on. Everyone starts at with some kind of biases and assumptions and unless they go through a life changing experience like I, and apparently you, have with Christ, nothing is going to change their minds.

I would like to clear up one issue here though. People seem to be assuming that all Creatioinist are Young Earth Creationist. This really isn't the case. As near as I can tell there are 3 main groups of Creationist with sincere Bible beleiving people in all of them who accept the innerrancy and inspiration of the Bible. Those groups can best be summed up as Young Earth Creationist which include people like Dr. Kurt Wise, a Harvard Graduate in Paleontology who studied under Gould. Old Earth Creationist who reject Evelution as not being mathematically plausible which includes people like Dr. Hugh Ross, an Astrophysist and founder of Reasons to Believe. The final group of Creationist are those who accept an Old Earth and also accept Evolution as the means by which God created life. I do not have a name of a famous person in this group, but I do have a friend who has a doctorate from Harvard who studies the corrolation between geological developement and atmospheric development who fits into this category. I can emphatically say that he believes in the innerrancy and inspiration of the Bible and in God, but accepts the possibilty, which is by no means proven, that evolution is also correct. He simply assumes that this is how God created life.

Personally I am currently leaning towards the Old Earth non-evolution group, but I will by no means reject the Young Earth group or the other Old Earth group. I simply do not know. What I do know is that as an Evangelical Christian it is my purpose in life to tell as many people as will listen, about the God of the Bible and what He has done for me personally and for them and then leave it up to them and the influence of God to decide whether or not to accept that Truth, the only Truth in my opinion, or reject it. What I will not do is reject the existence of God. My personal experience have proven emphatically to me that God is real, He does exist, and He is the God of the Christian Bible.

As to whether or not I would buy this game, if it is interesting and has good game play probably. If it does not, no.

Timothy Pintello

[Maniac]

CormacMacArt, sigh, are you again using that Newton example? I hope I don't rip your world image apart by saying this, but I have read that Isaac Newton claimed God had something to do with it, simply so he wouldn't get into trouble with the Church and follow the fate of Galileï.

And now back in shut-up-mode, 'cause we ain't gonna change anybody's ideas anyway (echoing myself).

[CormacMacArt]

Is there an echo in here?

[SkeleTony69]

For some reason AOL keeps booting me without warning everytime I try to post a response to Cormac here(I have typed pages,not easy for me being a hunt & peck-er,only to have this happen just as I am about to post my reply)so if any one would care to carry this debate on or would like to point me to a more appropriate place to engage in this sort of rhetoric,please email me.
tonedeth69@aol.com

[Krusty]

Somebody out there answer the question:

"How is Pokemon satanic?"

[lemur866]

Originally posted by CormacMacArt on 01-05-2000 11:41 AM
To answer the question:

The question is: "Why do you choose to believe special creation of life on this planet, as opposed to the slow evolution of life over millions of years?" I can only answer for myself; I chose to believe the Person Who healed my insanity. I have no problems with other Christians who feel that God was working through evolution (C.S.Lewis comes to mind).

I have never seen any good come from arguing Creation vs. Evolution and I believe that is for one very good reason. Most of those who fervently believe in evolution and feel the need to argue against creation are Atheists and an Atheist has no choice but to believe in evolution.

Ummm....Cormac, an atheist such as myself could believe in all sorts of things besides evolution. Just think about all the other religions out there that believe in other sorts of creation mythology than yours. Did YHWH create the first man out of dust, or did Prometheus and Epimethius fashion them from clay? Or was it Krishna or some other nonsense? The reason atheists all seem to believe in evolution is that it is the only theory of how life came to be that has withstood scientific scrutiny.

And please don't say that your assertions for how life came to be are not scientific and therefore are not subject to review. If you make a claim about the universe, I have the right to know WHY you make that claim. If you say, "I have faith," that means to me that you have chosen that belief for NO reason, that you have nothing to back up your beliefs. That's fine, but why would I give your beliefs any credence? You have to do better than that.

Otherwise, why could't I claim to believe that life on earth arose from invisible pink unicorns. You can't disprove it, can you? But when you ask me WHY I believe in invisible pink unicorns, I say that there is no evidence, I just have faith that they exist. Now, have I done a good job of changing your mind or not?


------------------
Think Galactically -- Act Terrestrially