Religion Randomness

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Fri Aug 15, 2014 9:58 am

Dallas researchers are out to scientifically prove the biblical version of creation

[A]t the Institute for Creation Research in northwest Dallas, a group of nine Ph.D.s from places like Harvard and Los Alamos National Laboratory say all that molecules-to-man stuff is nonsense. And they’re out to prove it.

The biblical story of Genesis is literally true, they say. God created the heavens, earth and life in six sequential days lasting about 24 hours each.
...
“Our attempt is to demonstrate that the Bible is accurate, not just religiously authoritative,” said Henry Morris III, CEO of the nonprofit with a 49-person payroll and an annual budget in the $7 million range.

“The rationale behind it is this: If God really does exist, he shouldn’t be lying to us,” he said. “And if he’s lying to us right off the bat in the book of Genesis, we’ve got some real problems.”
...
This spring, televangelist Pat Robertson said on the Christian-themed television show The 700 Club that people would “have to be deaf, dumb and blind to think that this earth that we live on only has 6,000 years of existence. I think to deny the clear [geologic] record that’s there before us makes us look silly.”
...
Christian apologetics are in Morris’ blood. His father, Henry Madison Morris, founded creation science. A college professor and hydraulic engineer, he co-authored The Genesis Flood in 1961, which argued that the epic biblical rainstorm was responsible for the geologic signatures scientists use to support their theory of an ancient planet.

The earth doesn’t look old, creationists say, it looks flooded. Morris founded ICR in San Diego in 1970, as a research arm of the growing “young-earth” creationist movement. The nonprofit moved to Dallas in 2006 and now employs six members of the Morris family.
...
[Jason Lisle, an astrophysicist and the research director at ICR] says his team analyzes the same data as secular scientists — but they interpret it differently, and often find flaws in accepted assumptions.

For example, Lisle cites the “spiral winding problem” as evidence that galaxies cannot be billions of years old. Essentially, he says if stars had been swinging around galactic centers for billions of years, they’d look more like massive phonograph records than what we see through telescopes, which are loose, hurricane-shaped spirals.

Or oceans — if they’d been around a billion years, they should be more salty. Or genetic mutations — if humans are hundreds of thousands of years old, there should be more genetic wrinkles in our DNA. Or dinosaur bones — if they’re millions of years old, scientists should not be recovering soft, protein-based tissue in them.
...
“Evolutionists say in response to this, ‘We have to rethink this process of fossilization,’” Sherwin said.

“But our rejoinder is, ‘What’s to rethink? It looks like this creature died perhaps centuries ago.’”

LawBeefaroni · Post by **LawBeefaroni** » Fri Aug 15, 2014 10:25 am

Those with faith don't need proof. Those without faith won't buy their faith-based pseudo-science. So it means that $7M/year revenue equates to about $3.5M in 49 salaries for doing fuckall to advance science. Bravo.

(All in addition to Henry Morris III, CEO ($169K), John Morris, President ($120K), and Eileen Turner, CFO ($102K))

So I wouldn't say this is about religion so much as it is about a supplemental income.

Zarathud · Post by **Zarathud** » Fri Aug 15, 2014 2:25 pm

And $7 million of charitable tax deductions, which is likely around $2.5 million in lost tax revenue that could be devoted to real science.

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Fri Aug 15, 2014 2:41 pm

What I like is that the biblical version uses a earth centric time unit, like God decided (or it just worked out nicely) that he's going to get things done in a timeframe that will be unique (you know what I mean, there are a quadrillion examples out there, all different) to Earth. Because we're special of course, despite the quadrillion other floating masses spinning and rotating around stars.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Fri Aug 15, 2014 5:06 pm

If Pat Robertson is telling you that you're applying Christian text too literally and look nutty, you should probably stop and do a hard reassessment of yourself.

Dr. Sugardaddy · Post by **Dr. Sugardaddy** » Fri Aug 15, 2014 8:39 pm

El Guapo wrote:If Pat Robertson is telling you that you're applying Christian text too literally and look nutty, you should probably stop and do a hard reassessment of yourself.

Bingo.

gilraen · Post by **gilraen** » Fri Aug 15, 2014 9:09 pm

Apparently this just goes to show that having a Ph.D. from Harvard doesn't mean you're smart.

Daehawk · Post by **Daehawk** » Fri Aug 15, 2014 9:11 pm

When folk like this 'set out to prove something' they usually succeed. Funny how that works.

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Fri Aug 15, 2014 9:23 pm

Science. You're doing it backwards.

LawBeefaroni · Post by **LawBeefaroni** » Fri Aug 15, 2014 9:39 pm

gilraen wrote:Apparently this just goes to show that having a Ph.D. from Harvard doesn't mean you're smart.

Bilking the faithful out of millions to ghost payroll your family doesn't mean you're not smart.

gilraen · Post by **gilraen** » Sat Aug 16, 2014 1:10 am

LawBeefaroni wrote:
gilraen wrote:Apparently this just goes to show that having a Ph.D. from Harvard doesn't mean you're smart.
Bilking the faithful out of millions to ghost payroll your family doesn't mean you're not smart.

No, you just have to be smarter than they are...

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Sat Aug 16, 2014 1:37 am

LawBeefaroni wrote:
gilraen wrote:Apparently this just goes to show that having a Ph.D. from Harvard doesn't mean you're smart.
Bilking the faithful out of millions to ghost payroll your family doesn't mean you're not smart.

Cleverness is the most lucrative form of intelligence.

Grifman · Post by **Grifman** » Sat Aug 16, 2014 7:13 am

GreenGoo wrote:What I like is that the biblical version uses a earth centric time unit, like God decided (or it just worked out nicely) that he's going to get things done in a timeframe that will be unique (you know what I mean, there are a quadrillion examples out there, all different) to Earth. Because we're special of course, despite the quadrillion other floating masses spinning and rotating around stars.

I'm not a young earther by any means but this isn't really much of an argument. If the days are symbolic units of time, and since the Bible was written to humans (for which the rotational period of Alpha Centauri would have little meaning), the use of days as a time period is both reasonable and logical.

Grifman · Post by **Grifman** » Sat Aug 16, 2014 7:20 am

Zarathud wrote:And $7 million of charitable tax deductions, which is likely around $2.5 million in lost tax revenue that could be devoted to real science.

Or could be devoted to buying Skittles. Or could be devoted to nothing. It's not like federal funding for research is going to go up if these deductions weren't allowed.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Sat Aug 16, 2014 11:13 am

Grifman, that's putting the cart before the horse. A day requires the sun and earth. There was no sun until "day 4".

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Sat Aug 16, 2014 12:15 pm

Isgrimnur wrote:Grifman, that's putting the cart before the horse. A day requires the sun and earth. There was no sun until "day 4".

God decided to give Earth the exact rotation and orbit to coincide with each major accomplishment. It's not that everything took 1 day each, it's that everything took the same amount of time so God decided to make Earth's days match up. Q.E.D.

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Sat Aug 16, 2014 12:44 pm

The whole point of YE creationism is that creation doesn't proceed from physical laws; it's the other way around. God didn't do his work, measure each stage, and then call that length of time a day. He could have done the whole thing in a microsecond, but he chose otherwise. The fact that this span coincides with what our pious ancestors considered a week is simply a sign of their closer relationship to the Divine.

See how easy this is? I'll take a check.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Sat Aug 16, 2014 1:26 pm

Grifman wrote:I'm not a young earther by any means but this isn't really much of an argument. If the days are symbolic units of time, and since the Bible was written to humans (for which the rotational period of Alpha Centauri would have little meaning), the use of days as a time period is both reasonable and logical.

I don't think anyone has an issue with the days being symbolic units. I think they just have an issue with them being literal units.

Of course I have a problem with there being units at all. I feel like an omnipotent creator of the universe should be able to just make it so, instantaneously.

Grifman · Post by **Grifman** » Sat Aug 16, 2014 8:56 pm

Isgrimnur wrote:Grifman, that's putting the cart before the horse. A day requires the sun and earth. There was no sun until "day 4".

That's a totally different issue. That said, this again goes to symbolism, rather than literalness, so you're only making my point for me.

Grifman · Post by **Grifman** » Sat Aug 16, 2014 8:59 pm

GreenGoo wrote:
Isgrimnur wrote:Grifman, that's putting the cart before the horse. A day requires the sun and earth. There was no sun until "day 4".
God decided to give Earth the exact rotation and orbit to coincide with each major accomplishment.

Again, only if you are woodenly taking the text literally. A day could mean a "period of time".

It's not that everything took 1 day each, it's that everything took the same amount of time so God decided to make Earth's days match up. Q.E.D.

Again, literalism. You seem to be repeating the same error again and again.

Grifman · Post by **Grifman** » Sat Aug 16, 2014 9:03 pm

RunningMn9 wrote:Of course I have a problem with there being units at all. I feel like an omnipotent creator of the universe should be able to just make it so, instantaneously.

But where's the fun in that?

God can choose to create the world however he wanted. Maybe the process was as much for us to learn and understand and find amazement in as much as anything else.

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Sun Aug 17, 2014 3:09 pm

Grifman wrote:Again, literalism. You seem to be repeating the same error again and again.

Did you read the OP? I'm not the one making that mistake.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Sun Aug 17, 2014 5:05 pm

Grifman wrote:But where's the fun in that? God can choose to create the world however he wanted. Maybe the process was as much for us to learn and understand and find amazement in as much as anything else.

I prefer my omnipotent deities to be efficient.

Grifman · Post by **Grifman** » Mon Aug 18, 2014 11:41 am

RunningMn9 wrote:
Grifman wrote:But where's the fun in that? God can choose to create the world however he wanted. Maybe the process was as much for us to learn and understand and find amazement in as much as anything else.
I prefer my omnipotent deities to be efficient.

Only if efficiency is your god

Grifman · Post by **Grifman** » Mon Aug 18, 2014 11:43 am

Looks like Richard Dawkins is trying to imitate the Creation Institute folks:

http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/928 ... rd-dawkins

The Richard Dawkins website offers followers the chance to join the ‘Reason Circle’, which, like Dante’s Hell, is arranged in concentric circles. For $85 a month, you get discounts on his merchandise, and the chance to meet ‘Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science personalities’. Obviously that’s not enough to meet the man himself. For that you pay $210 a month — or $5,000 a year — for the chance to attend an event where he will speak.

When you compare this to the going rate for other charismatic preachers, it does seem on the high side. The Pentecostal evangelist Morris Cerullo, for example, charges only $30 a month to become a member of ‘God’s Victorious Army’, which is bringing ‘healing and deliverance to the world’. And from Cerullo you get free DVDs, not just discounts.

But the $85 a month just touches the hem of rationality. After the neophyte passes through the successively more expensive ‘Darwin Circle’ and then the ‘Evolution Circle’, he attains the innermost circle, where for $100,000 a year or more he gets to have a private breakfast or lunch with Richard Dawkins, and a reserved table at an invitation-only circle event with ‘Richard’ as well as ‘all the benefits listed above’, so he still gets a discount on his Richard Dawkins T-shirt saying ‘Religion — together we can find a cure.’

The website suggests that donations of up to $500,000 a year will be accepted for the privilege of eating with him once a year: at this level of contribution you become a member of something called ‘The Magic of Reality Circle’. I don’t think any irony is intended.

Will there be the same level of umbrage at this?

Who's bilking the faithful now?

Grifman · Post by **Grifman** » Mon Aug 18, 2014 11:47 am

GreenGoo wrote:
Grifman wrote:Again, literalism. You seem to be repeating the same error again and again.
Did you read the OP? I'm not the one making that mistake.

I read the OP but you seem to be insisting that this is the only way to read the account in Genesis, but perhaps I'm misunderstanding you.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Mon Aug 18, 2014 1:19 pm

Grifman wrote:Will there be the same level of umbrage at this?

From who? Me? Yes, that sounds like one of the most absurd things I've seen in a long while. Almost like it's meant to be a satirical take on Scientology.

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Mon Aug 18, 2014 7:30 pm

RunningMn9 wrote:
Grifman wrote:Will there be the same level of umbrage at this?
From who? Me? Yes, that sounds like one of the most absurd things I've seen in a long while. Almost like it's meant to be a satirical take on Scientology.

I believe Fox News is our go-to organization for taking satire literally and then taking umbrage.

As for me, I don't take umbrage. I think the idea is hilarious. The people that should be taking umbrage are the people financing this.

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Mon Aug 18, 2014 7:31 pm

Grifman wrote:
GreenGoo wrote:
Grifman wrote:Again, literalism. You seem to be repeating the same error again and again.
Did you read the OP? I'm not the one making that mistake.
I read the OP but you seem to be insisting that this is the only way to read the account in Genesis, but perhaps I'm misunderstanding you.

The only people insisting on a literal translation are those who insist on a literal translation (like the people in the op of this thread). I was mocking the idea.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Fri Oct 24, 2014 8:08 pm

OK State Capitol Ten Commandments vandalized:

A man has been taken in for mental evaluation after allegedly vandalizing the Ten Commandments monument at the Oklahoma State Capitol.

U.S. Secret Service Agents say it all started after a man walked into the Federal Building in downtown Oklahoma City Friday morning making strange threats against the President and Federal Government.

Agents say he then admitted to them that he crashed his car into the Ten Commandments monument at the Capitol, then left his damaged car and walked to the Federal Building.

The Secret Service says the man told them that Satan made him crash his car into the statue.

He also told agents that Satan told him to urinate on the statue.

According to investigators, the man says he is bipolar and had been off his medication for quite some time.

Grifman · Post by **Grifman** » Sat Oct 25, 2014 1:00 pm

He also told agents that Satan told him to urinate on the statue.

What a piss poor excuse.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Fri Jan 16, 2015 12:35 am

Alex Malarkey, subject of The Boy Who Came Back From Heaven, states that he made it all up:

Nearly five years after it hit bestseller lists, a book that purported to be a six-year-old boy's story of visiting angels and heaven after suffering a bad car crash is being pulled from shelves. The young man at the center of The Boy Who Came Back from Heaven, Alex Malarkey, said this week that the story was all made up.

The book's publisher, Tyndale House, had promoted it as "a supernatural encounter that will give you new insights on Heaven, angels, and hearing the voice of God."

But Thursday, Tyndale House confirmed to NPR that it is taking "the book and all ancillary products out of print."

The decision to pull the book comes after Alex Malarkey wrote an open letter to retailer LifeWay and others who sell Christian books and religious materials. It was published this week on the Pulpit and Pen website.

"I did not die. I did not go to Heaven," Alex wrote. He continued, "I said I went to heaven because I thought it would get me attention. When I made the claims that I did, I had never read the Bible. People have profited from lies, and continue to. They should read the Bible, which is enough. The Bible is the only source of truth. Anything written by man cannot be infallible."

Alefroth · Post by **Alefroth** » Fri Jan 16, 2015 4:18 am

So it was all just a bunch of...

Grifman · Post by **Grifman** » Fri Jan 16, 2015 4:51 pm

Alefroth wrote:So it was all just a bunch of...

Yes, ironic, isn't it?

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Fri Jan 16, 2015 5:43 pm

Malarkey wrote: "The Bible is the only source of truth. Anything written by man cannot be infallible."

Honestly, I liked him better as the hugged-by-an-angel kid.

Moliere · Post by **Moliere** » Fri Jan 16, 2015 5:45 pm

Holman wrote:
Malarkey wrote: "The Bible is the only source of truth. Anything written by man cannot be infallible."
Honestly, I liked him better as the hugged-by-an-angel kid.

Isn't his statement self-contradictory? How can he write that the bible is the only source of truth and then say anything written by man is fallible?

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Fri Jan 16, 2015 6:35 pm

Moliere wrote:
Holman wrote:
Malarkey wrote: "The Bible is the only source of truth. Anything written by man cannot be infallible."
Honestly, I liked him better as the hugged-by-an-angel kid.
Isn't his statement self-contradictory? How can he write that the bible is the only source of truth and then say anything written by man is fallible?

Naw. The claim is that the Bible is our only reliable access to *ultimate* truth. All else (including his own opinion there) is to be judged by its accordance with biblical truth. He believes that what he says is true because it does not contradict [his reading of] the Bible.

LawBeefaroni · Post by **LawBeefaroni** » Fri Jan 16, 2015 6:48 pm

Moliere wrote:
Holman wrote:
Malarkey wrote: "The Bible is the only source of truth. Anything written by man cannot be infallible."
Honestly, I liked him better as the hugged-by-an-angel kid.
Isn't his statement self-contradictory? How can he write that the bible is the only source of truth and then say anything written by man is fallible?

Moliere · Post by **Moliere** » Tue Jan 27, 2015 6:33 pm

LDS Church backs LGBT nondiscrimination and religious freedom bills

When the LDS church starts going soft on their bigotry towards the LGBT community you know the political zeitgeist has shifted.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Tue Jan 27, 2015 6:43 pm

It's progress, but the "religious freedom" aspect is still troubling.

But the church also complained of people being branded “bigots” for speaking for their faith.

“When religious people are publicly intimidated, retaliated against, forced from employment or made to suffer personal loss because they have raised their voice in the public square, donated to a cause or participated in an election, our democracy is the loser,” said Elder Dallin Oaks, a member of the church’s Quorum of Twelve Apostles.

Even with the new nondiscrimination position, they still want to be seen as victims.