Religion

Thats my opinion

(2,001 posts)

29. Ptolemy (ism) was also orthodox science.

Tue Feb 14, 2012, 07:03 PM

Feb 2012

Both science and religion have found new insights. While you celebrate the scientific side of things, I ask you also to celebrate the religious side--even if you are not religious. Or is prejudice against the latter just too strong?

Decreasingly fundamentalists have the numbers and the money, while their current strength cannot be denied.. I know of no progressive Christians who take Santorum seriously--just the opposite. Someone has said he is a good 13th century religionists. Increasingly many of us are hardly there. You better be happy that we are around. We will need each other in November. Continue to write us off is like clobbering a brother because you don't like the suit he is wearing.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

77 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Genesis Veracity Foundation! [View all] onager Feb 2012 OP

Pointless, worthless and not needed. Believe or don't on your own decision. Kurmudgeon Feb 2012 #1

Thanks for the rave review! onager Feb 2012 #4

Thought I was agreeing with you. Oh well..... Kurmudgeon Feb 2012 #6

What does "on your own decision" have to do with any of this? Silent3 Feb 2012 #9

You are talking about your post, right? cleanhippie Feb 2012 #10

I think that Kurmudgeon was referring to the Genesis Veracity Foundation, not to anyone's post. LeftishBrit Feb 2012 #74

I'm not convinced. cleanhippie Feb 2012 #77

if someone believes the creation stories are literally true Enrique Feb 2012 #2

Disprove one first. Kurmudgeon Feb 2012 #3

C'mon, even if you're a creationist, it's clear that this site was created by an insane person. DCKit Feb 2012 #5

I already stated I thought the site was bunk. Kurmudgeon Feb 2012 #7

Given your eloquent reply, I'm not (and never) going to fight with you. DCKit Feb 2012 #8

What's Crazy? James I. Nienhuis Feb 2012 #37

You really believe in a historical Jesus? mr blur Feb 2012 #12

Historical Evidence Jesus James I. Nienhuis Feb 2012 #70

More historical evidence for Jesus than Buddha? Really? darkstar3 Feb 2012 #71

Horsecrap dmallind Feb 2012 #72

Day nor Hour James I. Nienhuis Feb 2012 #35

Prove one first. cleanhippie Feb 2012 #11

It's not up to skeptics to disprove a fantastic claim EvolveOrConvolve Feb 2012 #13

Why Darwin? James I. Nienhuis Feb 2012 #36

Study some microbiology. darkstar3 Feb 2012 #41

No Experiments One Syngameon Changing to New One James I. Nienhuis Feb 2012 #43

Two problems there. darkstar3 Feb 2012 #45

You're Wrong Three Times James I. Nienhuis Feb 2012 #48

Not only did you just move the arbitrary goalposts you set up, but darkstar3 Feb 2012 #51

Crowing Cock Out Your Door James I. Nienhuis Feb 2012 #53

Gen 1:25-27 and 2:18-22 cannot both be true. Hence one disproves the other. nt dmallind Feb 2012 #15

Give it a rest. Thats my opinion Feb 2012 #20

And YOU keep claiming that your version is actually "contemporary theology.", darkstar3 Feb 2012 #21

You'd be better served answering the actual literal challenge then, surely? dmallind Feb 2012 #23

Of course! Thats my opinion Feb 2012 #24

How are they NOT here when we were challenged to disprove a Genesis creation story HERE? dmallind Feb 2012 #25

I guess I missed that post Thats my opinion Feb 2012 #26

There's only 26 to look at and this one was #3 dmallind Feb 2012 #27

It is a pretty wide jump to get that out of #3 Thats my opinion Feb 2012 #28

Deny. Move goalposts. Marginalize. darkstar3 Feb 2012 #30

Really? What the FUCK do you think "disprove one" means? dmallind Feb 2012 #31

I took it as a challenge hfojvt Feb 2012 #32

Fair enough... LeftishBrit Feb 2012 #75

Wonderful. jeepnstein Feb 2012 #14

Why should we be spending time and effort kicking at a straw man? Thats my opinion Feb 2012 #16

Because a sizeable plurality if not outright majority of believers take this crap seriously dmallind Feb 2012 #17

You bet we should! Thats my opinion Feb 2012 #18

And when they just look blankly in return, can we converse on their level then? dmallind Feb 2012 #19

Straw man? He's a real person with an audience. onager Feb 2012 #22

Ptolemy (ism) was also orthodox science. Thats my opinion Feb 2012 #29

Just what "insights" has religion found? cleanhippie Feb 2012 #33

Fountains Deep for Ice Age James I. Nienhuis Feb 2012 #38

No, that's a supposition carved out of wholecloth solely to support a ridiculous myth. darkstar3 Feb 2012 #40

How Dense Global Cloudcover? James I. Nienhuis Feb 2012 #42

You'd have to be more specific about which ice age you're talking about, darkstar3 Feb 2012 #47

Any of "Them" James I. Nienhuis Feb 2012 #56

No, I really can't "pick any" ice age to answer your question. darkstar3 Feb 2012 #60

How Were "They" Different? James I. Nienhuis Feb 2012 #61

I could summarize this post as NTS darkstar3 Feb 2012 #63

I See James I. Nienhuis Feb 2012 #65

Post removed Post removed Feb 2012 #62

Ahahahahaha! cleanhippie Feb 2012 #44

What No Answer? James I. Nienhuis Feb 2012 #49

I'm sure he's busy posting to FSTDT. darkstar3 Feb 2012 #52

Really? James I. Nienhuis Feb 2012 #54

Why don't you Google it and find out? darkstar3 Feb 2012 #55

NTS James I. Nienhuis Feb 2012 #57

Oh I beg to differ. :) darkstar3 Feb 2012 #58

Beg On James I. Nienhuis Feb 2012 #59

Thanks for the laughs. darkstar3 Feb 2012 #64

Good For You James I. Nienhuis Feb 2012 #66

You're killin' me smalls! darkstar3 Feb 2012 #67

Funny Retreat James I. Nienhuis Feb 2012 #68

Now Ice Age Please James I. Nienhuis Feb 2012 #69

Because these 'straw men' have influence on education and politics. LeftishBrit Feb 2012 #76

Why No Refutations? James I. Nienhuis Feb 2012 #34

Listening to What Why? James I. Nienhuis Feb 2012 #39

I think he was hoping to hear your call in to the show. cleanhippie Feb 2012 #46

Thank You I Guess James I. Nienhuis Feb 2012 #50

Well, since you asked... onager Feb 2012 #73