Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2005 12:36 pm
i'm not sure who that insults more..me or him? 
Illegitimi non carborundum
https://songfight.net/forums/
His day is coming!anti-m wrote:....the church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster??
He's a man of pretty convenient faith. Seems he'll take whatever fits his view of the world ("oh, only the obvious is literal, the rest is allegory"). I respect his approach and all, but I don't get how spiritual existence need be separate from nature? Is it not natural to have such spiritual experiences? The super-natural is a label we apply to things we can't grasp. But it is a natural phenomenon. Why does it need to be excused from rational understanding, and given a free pass, thereby justifying "faith based" existence? I don't see why we can't one day achieve significant understanding of spiritual concepts, just as we now understand the human genome (or some of us, anyway).jack wrote:i thought this was a pretty fascinating interview with francis collins, founder of the human genome project and hardcore atheist-turned christian.
while neither advocating or condoning his position, i just thought it was interesting to see how a completely scientific mind comes to accept something so unscientific as religion. pretty convenient faith maybe but i'd say that's true of most of us. i 'd consider faith to be pretty personal and unconventional and as far as i'm concerned fitting of my view of the world, the only one i know. i personally think the bible is a combination of observation and allegory, or fact and fiction if you like, considering the 4 gospels are written from interpretations from 4 different people after the fact. i thought the point he made about humans having this inate sense of right and wrong and wanting to do the right thing, including sacrificing their own life (and their species ability to propagate) has no scientific reasoning in fact.roymond wrote:He's a man of pretty convenient faith. Seems he'll take whatever fits his view of the world ("oh, only the obvious is literal, the rest is allegory"). I respect his approach and all, but I don't get how spiritual existence need be separate from nature? Is it not natural to have such spiritual experiences? The super-natural is a label we apply to things we can't grasp. But it is a natural phenomenon. Why does it need to be excused from rational understanding, and given a free pass, thereby justifying "faith based" existence? I don't see why we can't one day achieve significant understanding of spiritual concepts, just as we now understand the human genome (or some of us, anyway).jack wrote:i thought this was a pretty fascinating interview with francis collins, founder of the human genome project and hardcore atheist-turned christian.
The trouble with "Mere Christianity" is it assumes the reader (or listener) believes in the existence of a universal set of ethics. If you don't, the rest of the essays will not do much for you.Dr. Francis S. Collins wrote:..."Mere Christianity" by C.S. Lewis. Lewis had been an atheist [and] set out as I did to convince himself of the correctness of his position and accidentally converted himself. I took the book home, and in the first few pages realized that all of my arguments in favor of atheism were quickly reduced to rubble by the simple logic of this clear-thinking Oxford scholar.
C. S. Lewis wrote:If no set of moral ideas were truer or better than any other, there would be no sense in preferring civilised morality to savage morality, or Christian morality to Nazi morality. In fact, of course, we all do believe that some moralities are better than others.