Can I get away with this? It's kind of a religious thread, but I am attacking my own camp in a way. http://www.blasphemychallenge.com/ The Rational Response Squad is trying to get people to "deny the Holy Spirit." This movement is fundamentally flawed. To deny that which cannot be understood rationally is to be irrational. What rational evidence is there to deny the existence of the Holy Spirit? Lack of positive evidence is not proof of the converse. Without rational evidence either way, any assertion on the matter must necessarily employ faith, and faith is not rational. Therefore this movement is not rational and is self-defeating by way of its own criticism. In summary... be tolerant.
Bloody Mary is a childs game designed to freak people out. What you do: 1. go into a small dark room such as a bathroom. 2. look into the mirror and say Bloody Mary 3 times. 3.Bloody Mary shows up as your reflection and scares you. I've tried this when I was younger and it didn't work - guess I'm immune
My favorite activity... DEBATE I have been sparring in the comments: http://throwawayyourtv.com/2006/12/blasphemy-challenge.html
dumb S%^# this is one of the most retarded things ive ever seen especially from "younger ppl" they need to read a book called "Not Just A Carpenter" its writen by a athiest<-- if thats how u spell it) he eventually turns christain along with MANY other Harvard/Yale Professors because its all proven facts....im not tryn to preach ...and im definatly NOT the best guy that lived but after u hear the facts how could u not believe...just dont see the point in ruining the easy part OUT. ; /
Go Jake Go! I just finished a class called "Evolutionary Concepts", where we studied the 'evolution' of the Theory of Evolution. Most of the modern scientists whose papers we read would agree with your point Jake. Read Theodosius Dobzhanski for some arguements in support. Also, from the foreword to Pojeta and Springer's Evolution and the Fossil Record, "Science proceeds by testing hypotheses and thus is restricted to natural, testable explanations. By definition, science is unable to confirm or deny the existence or work of a Creator; such questions are beyond the realm of science."
I think he is referring to the fact that I am attacking my own camp. I tend to side with the nonbelievers. I'll show you my stance.
Large chunks of Hyperborean's long statement near the end don't seem to be making sense. Is it just me?
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/grittv-frank-schaeffer-fears-fundamentalis The equivalencies that Frank Schaeffer draws mirror my own views. I tend to view outspoken nonbelievers as no better than their believer counterparts. Both exhibit the same zealous proselytizing about their faith-based views. As I said in my first post, any assertion on something like God necessarily employs faith. I recommend you watch the whole 20 minute video. It's pretty insightful if you can look past the sharp edges that he casts sometimes. Be warned... he is not a fan of republicans or evangelicals.
