"The Wasting of the Evangelical Mind"

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
7,102
Reaction score
3,443
Points
113
This is correct.
An atheist must make assumptions, the first being that something can come from nothing. The second is that humanity is the highest level of being and there is no other being in existence that could create the universe. The third is that only the material world exists.
The numbers reveal that the odds on life ever happening is so infinitely small that what we observe should not exist. Yet, the atheist insists there is no, and cannot ever have been an intelligent designer who created.
The agnostic is simply one who chooses to have no reason and thus ride the fence.
The theist uses reason and determines there must be an intelligent designer who created.
The most reasonable explanation is an intelligent designer.


Where did God come from?
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
9,564
Reaction score
1,253
Points
113
Yes, I am not an Atheist, it to me is almost as rediculous as believing in God, it isn't close to believing in God and knowing you believe in the "correct God" that is second level rediculous.

Why would I profess any belief that is completely devoid of evidence.
Indeed, you are an agnostic who has renounced reason altogether so you can sit on the fence and bitch at everyone...
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
9,564
Reaction score
1,253
Points
113
Where did God come from?
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
What options have theists provided? Which option is most reasonable?
Or, choose atheism.
But, you sit on the fence, refusing to use reason and just bitch.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
7,102
Reaction score
3,443
Points
113
What options have theists provided? Which option is most reasonable?
Or, choose atheism.
But, you sit on the fence, refusing to use reason and just bitch.

If I use reason all I come up with at best is a probability and its not heavily weighted to either side.

If there is a god, the most I could believe is that it set things in motion. Not intelligent design in the way Christians believe. Thats loony bin stuff imho.
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
9,564
Reaction score
1,253
Points
113
If I use reason all I come up with at best is a probability and its not heavily weighted to either side.

If there is a god, the most I could believe is that it set things in motion. Not intelligent design in the way Christians believe. Thats loony bin stuff imho.
If you used reason and saw the odds, you wouldn't be on the fence.
Many of our nation's founders were Deists who considered a creator who set things in motion (like a clock maker) and lets the laws that are designed into the system function as necessary. That is one reasonable view. There are others. Golf may have his own view, but it seems he may have already expressed it in another thread.
 
Last edited:

golf

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2015
Messages
2,360
Reaction score
1,254
Points
113
If you used reason and saw the odds, you wouldn't be on the fence.
Many of our nation's founders were Deists who considered a creator who set things in motion (like a clock maker) and lets the laws that are designed into the system function as necessary. That is one reasonable view. There are others. Golf may have his own view, but it seems he may have already expressed it in another thread.

Yeah, regarding probability the counter is there are many different possible outcomes but this is just the one that happened to come to be. Doesnt make much sense to me as this one brought order from disorder so is not the same as other possible outcomes.
 

cncmin

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
17,956
Reaction score
2,172
Points
113
I should note that this was not a thread about religion. It's a thread about how a religious sect important to American politics has allowed itself to be largely misinformed and led astray from reality, and how this hurts America as a whole.
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
9,564
Reaction score
1,253
Points
113
Yeah, regarding probability the counter is there are many different possible outcomes but this is just the one that happened to come to be. Doesnt make much sense to me as this one brought order from disorder so is not the same as other possible outcomes.
I provided the numbers in the other thread. There is only one set of numbers that would allow for life to exist. It's a probability number so implausible that it takes great faith to believe what we have came from random selection rather than from intelligent design. A reasonable person would choose a design theory.
 

golf

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2015
Messages
2,360
Reaction score
1,254
Points
113
I provided the numbers in the other thread. There is only one set of numbers that would allow for life to exist. It's a probability number so implausible that it takes great faith to believe what we have came from random selection rather than from intelligent design. A reasonable person would choose a design theory.

I agree with your point. Was just trying to give a counter argument ive heard, but find unconvincing.
 

golf

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2015
Messages
2,360
Reaction score
1,254
Points
113
I should note that this was not a thread about religion. It's a thread about how a religious sect important to American politics has allowed itself to be largely misinformed and led astray from reality, and how this hurts America as a whole.

Hurts america is pretty strong. While the gospel and sharing it supersedes all by far, our church was a main driver in starting a medical clinic where there was no access before in an african country, we also send medical personnel there periodically to help. We built a halfway house to help released prisoners adjust back into society. Well over 100 youth go out from our church every summer to do building projects to help the needy. A group is provided to help people with addictions. This is just one church and just a sampling of what our church does. Just the positive humanitarian contributions of evangelical churches to this country verge on incalculable.

I cant say i am comfortable with how some of the leaders have become so politically minded. I know billy graham wasnt a pastor, but i am more comfortable with that model i think. Like most evangelical churches, our church avoids politics totally. If it didnt i wouldnt attend there.
 
Last edited:

cncmin

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
17,956
Reaction score
2,172
Points
113
Hurts america is pretty strong. While the gospel and sharing it supersedes all by far, our church was a main driver in starting a medical clinic where there was no access before in an african country, we also send medical personnel there periodically to help. We built a halfway house to help released prisoners adjust back into society. Well over 100 youth go out from our church every summer to do building projects to help the needy. A group is provided to help people with addictions. This is just one church and just a sampling of what our church does. Just the positive humanitarian contributions of evangelical churches to this country verge on incalculable.

I cant say i am comfortable with how some of the leaders have become so politically minded. I know billy graham wasnt a pastor, but i am more comfortable with that model i think. Like most evangelical churches, our church avoids politics totally. If it didnt i wouldnt attend there.
All of those things that you listed are awesome and positive contributions to society (and thank you for being a part of that). I have Evangelical friends who are some of the very best all-around people I know. So please don't think I'm knocking individual aspects of Evangelicals.

My point is solely the exposed and dangerous political position Evangelicals have put us in by their predisposition to readily accept misinformation and be fooled by political scoundrels and misfits, and the terrible effects those have on the long-term stability of this great country. I want to be part of building this country with my Evangelical, Baptist, Catholic, protestant, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, agnostic, and atheist brothers and sisters. But we can't build it properly when certain folks are too busy believing in and actively acting on garbage that divides us and tears us apart.
 
Last edited:

jamiche

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2008
Messages
22,198
Reaction score
2,266
Points
113
All of those things that you listed are awesome and positive contributions to society (and thank you for being a part of that). I have Evangelical friends who are some of the very best all-around people I know. So please don't think I'm knocking individual aspects of Evangelicals.

My point is solely the exposed and dangerous political position Evangelicals have put us in by their predisposition to readily accept misinformation and be fooled by political scoundrels and misfits, and the terrible effects those have on the long-term stability of this great country. I want to be part of building this country with my Evangelical, Baptist, Catholic, protestant, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, agnostic, and atheist brothers and sisters. But we can't build it properly when certain folks are too busy believing in and actively acting on garbage that divides us and tears us apart.
To be fair to Evangelicals, they aren't the only ones buying and acting on the constant lies and misinformation of donald. (Certain ultra Orthodox Jewish groups have continued to hold or try to hold super spreader events during COVID.) The problem is that the Evangelicals are by far the largest, wealthiest, politically active, enabling and most hypocritical of the groups Pied Pipered by donald. If they had chosen to act on what they professed to believe and blown him off, the country wouldn't have been in nearly as bad the condition it was in on 1/20/21. There were plenty of other anti abortion repubs to choose. Hell, they were all anti abortion, so it really wasn't that. It was about preserving a white Christian way of life, not a Christian way of life.
 

golf

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2015
Messages
2,360
Reaction score
1,254
Points
113
All of those things that you listed are awesome and positive contributions to society (and thank you for being a part of that). I have Evangelical friends who are some of the very best all-around people I know. So please don't think I'm knocking individual aspects of Evangelicals.

My point is solely the exposed and dangerous political position Evangelicals have put us in by their predisposition to readily accept misinformation and be fooled by political scoundrels and misfits, and the terrible effects those have on the long-term stability of this great country. I want to be part of building this country with my Evangelical, Baptist, Catholic, protestant, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, agnostic, and atheist brothers and sisters. But we can't build it properly when certain folks are too busy believing in and actively acting on garbage that divides us and tears us apart.

OK. That makes more sense to me. Sounds like your problem with evangelicals is a conservative/liberal issue which i can understand. Conservatives and liberals certainly have different ideas.
 

cncmin

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
17,956
Reaction score
2,172
Points
113
OK. That makes more sense to me. Sounds like your problem with evangelicals is a conservative/liberal issue which i can understand. Conservatives and liberals certainly have different ideas.
Well, not quite, and I warn that you're probably not going to like what I have to say below. I believe that "conservatives" and "liberals" both hold an important place in human society. The "liberals" try to advanced forward with societal and economic change, so to speak. The "conservatives" try to hold caution and preserve certain aspects of what's already there, so that change doesn't happen too fast. Together, when working properly and both sides compromising, society can advance forward at a proper pace and flourish.

But that's not what's going on now. The Democrats are a party of liberalism, indeed. But the Republicans are not "conservative" in the way their role demands. Hell, I'm probably more "conservative" than what the Republican Party stands for today. Instead, today's Republicans are lost in a mire of alternative reality, often devoid of fact or logic, and predicated solely on group think. They are also nearly completely unwilling to compromise; compromising and straying from party lines earns a Scarlet Letter label of "RINO". It's not only a true "cancel culture" at its very worst, it is a dangerous form of cultish corruption that threatens the very fabric of our very Constitutional Republic, very similarly to the former Confederacy; only more based on lies than founded beliefs or any true principles. So instead of a liberal/conservative divide, we have a centrist-left + liberal half of our politic, and then a second party who doesn't want to be a part of that fair political system whatsoever. This has to change - from the Republicans - if this country is to survive.

So back to your point, my problem with evangelicals has zero whatsoever to do with conservatism. I want them to be so. My problem with evangelicals is their susceptibility to lies and demagoguery, and their propagation and forcing of that destructive political garbage upon the rest of America. I want to see us succeed as a country, and for that to happen, we need true conservatism - that based on facts and reality and a dedication to our common advancement and good - to return.
 
Last edited:

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
23,497
Reaction score
5,609
Points
113
Well, not quite, and I warn that you're probably not going to like what I have to say below. I believe that "conservatives" and "liberals" both hold an important place in human society. The "liberals" try to advanced forward with societal and economic change, so to speak. The "conservatives" try to hold caution and preserve certain aspects of what's already there, so that change doesn't happen too fast. Together, when working properly and both sides compromising, society can advance forward at a proper pace and flourish.

But that's not what's going on now. The Democrats are a party of liberalism, indeed. But the Republicans are not "conservative" in the way their role demands. Hell, I'm probably more "conservative" than what the Republican Party stands for today. Instead, today's Republicans are lost in a mire of alternative reality, often devoid of fact or logic, and predicated solely on group think. They are also nearly completely unwilling to compromise; compromising and straying from party lines earns a Scarlet Letter label of "RINO". It's not only a true "cancel culture" at its very worst, it is a dangerous form of cultish corruption that threatens the very fabric of our very Constitutional Republic, very similarly to the former Confederacy; only more based on lies than founded beliefs or any true principles. So instead of a liberal/conservative divide, we have a centrist-left + liberal half of our politic, and then a second party who doesn't want to be a part of that fair political system whatsoever. This has to change - from the Republicans - if this country is to survive.

So back to your point, my problem with evangelicals has zero whatsoever to do with conservatism. I want them to be so. My problem with evangelicals is their susceptibility to lies and demagoguery, and their propagation and forcing of that destructive political garbage upon the rest of America. I want to see us succeed as a country, and for that to happen, we need true conservatism - that based on facts and reality and a dedication to our common advancement and good - to return.
Very well said.

If anything, I feel like Trumpism/Qism/whatever ism best describes people who want that, is nothing really more than a reaction to liberal progress.

They want to tear that down. They want to prevent any further progress. They want to prevent liberals from winning.

That's what they actually care about. They don't actually have a well-defined, well formed plan for how a society should/would better function, when they do win. Rather, the lazy, silly, and wrong fallback is "the absence of any intelligent planning and effort is the correct thing that we want". They only do that because they know if they actually tried something, it would be worse. But doing nothing is almost always just as bad.
 

golf

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2015
Messages
2,360
Reaction score
1,254
Points
113
Well, not quite, and I warn that you're probably not going to like what I have to say below. I believe that "conservatives" and "liberals" both hold an important place in human society. The "liberals" try to advanced forward with societal and economic change, so to speak. The "conservatives" try to hold caution and preserve certain aspects of what's already there, so that change doesn't happen too fast. Together, when working properly and both sides compromising, society can advance forward at a proper pace and flourish.

But that's not what's going on now. The Democrats are a party of liberalism, indeed. But the Republicans are not "conservative" in the way their role demands. Hell, I'm probably more "conservative" than what the Republican Party stands for today. Instead, today's Republicans are lost in a mire of alternative reality, often devoid of fact or logic, and predicated solely on group think. They are also nearly completely unwilling to compromise; compromising and straying from party lines earns a Scarlet Letter label of "RINO". It's not only a true "cancel culture" at its very worst, it is a dangerous form of cultish corruption that threatens the very fabric of our very Constitutional Republic, very similarly to the former Confederacy; only more based on lies than founded beliefs or any true principles. So instead of a liberal/conservative divide, we have a centrist-left + liberal half of our politic, and then a second party who doesn't want to be a part of that fair political system whatsoever. This has to change - from the Republicans - if this country is to survive.

So back to your point, my problem with evangelicals has zero whatsoever to do with conservatism. I want them to be so. My problem with evangelicals is their susceptibility to lies and demagoguery, and their propagation and forcing of that destructive political garbage upon the rest of America. I want to see us succeed as a country, and for that to happen, we need true conservatism - that based on facts and reality and a dedication to our common advancement and good - to return.

Conservatives have the same apocalyptic ideas about liberals. Which is why it seems to me the only solution is way more state power. Then people have an opportunity to live in an environment in which they are happy.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
23,497
Reaction score
5,609
Points
113
Conservatives have the same apocalyptic ideas about liberals. Which is why it seems to me the only solution is way more state power. Then people have an opportunity to live in an environment in which they are happy.
Nope. So long as its under one country, then each state will send people to Washington to try to control the other states. Which isn't wrong.

Your proposal is only acceptable with a formal nation split.

Only then, can each side stop having to care about the other. No different than how much we care about the politics of Canada, even though very much of the same battles rage over there.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
7,102
Reaction score
3,443
Points
113
Conservatives have the same apocalyptic ideas about liberals. Which is why it seems to me the only solution is way more state power. Then people have an opportunity to live in an environment in which they are happy.

Despite what they claim, Conservatives only support states rights on issues they support. If they could ever move beyond that blatant hypocrisy I would be much more apt to support them.
 

golf

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2015
Messages
2,360
Reaction score
1,254
Points
113
Nope. So long as its under one country, then each state will send people to Washington to try to control the other states. Which isn't wrong.

Your proposal is only acceptable with a formal nation split.

Only then, can each side stop having to care about the other. No different than how much we care about the politics of Canada, even though very much of the same battles rage over there.

DC power would be minimal - post office, amtrak, military, foreign policy, interstate highways.

States for example would control immigration. California could have open border, provide lots of services for immigrants, expand lottery and chain migration. Texas could lock down their border and minimize immigrant services. iEverybody is happy.

Education. Blue states can include 1619 and lgbtq in their curriculum and have boys play in girls sports. Free college. Red states can stay with traditional education. Everybody is happy.

Taxes. Blue states could increase and red states could decrease. Everybody is happy.

Healthcare. Blue states could adopt free health care and red states keep some sort of insurance model. Everybody is happy.

China virus. Think about how less combative it would have been if it was known up front that each state would be receiving info from the cdc and then could go their own path.

There is also more accountability when governance is local. Much less waste i would think. State power gives people options as they can move to a state that more closely reflects their viewpoints. Presidential campaigns, which seriously divide our country, would be much less consequential. A significant plus would be states would have more power to try different things and those that resulted in the best outcomes could be borrowed by other states.

Everyone would be much more happy.
 
Last edited:

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
7,102
Reaction score
3,443
Points
113
States for example would control immigration. California could have open border, provide lots of services for immigrants, expand lottery and chain migration. Texas could lock down their border and minimize immigrant services. Everybody is happy.

That is the end of the US as a country, completely rediculous take. Without free movement of citizens we have no country. This is an unimaginably bad idea, the consequences for the country would be catestrophic.


Education. Blue states can include 1619 and lgbtq in their curriculum and have boys play in girls sports. Free college. Red states can stay with traditional education. Everybody is happy.

Education is already under local control.


Healthcare. Blue states could adopt free health care and red states keep some sort of insurance model. Everybody is happy.

This is what we currently have.


There is also more accountability when governance is local.

I agree but most of what you state above is impossible or its already in place.
 

golf

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2015
Messages
2,360
Reaction score
1,254
Points
113
That is the end of the US as a country, completely rediculous take.




Education is already under local control.




This is what we currently have.




I agree but most of what you state above is impossible or its already in place.

Neither obamacare nor no child left behind were state programs. These programs caused division because they were crammed down on states that didnt want them.
Immigration also causes much division, letting each state do their own thing is a perfect solution. There would be no restriction of movement.
 
Last edited:

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
9,564
Reaction score
1,253
Points
113
Then where did God come from?!?! Nothing?!

:rolleyes:
There are multiple answers theists give to that question.The Christian answer is in their text, which says God has always been.
Some atheists, namely Richard Dawkins, cannot accept this answer. My guess is you follow Dawkins in not accepting the answer.
I am not concerned with where God comes from. I merely look at the mathematical evidence and reason that what we observe is not random, but is designed. The evidence points me to this reasonable position.
You may think that despite the astronomically small chances, it is reasonable to view life as entirely connected by random sequence of events over billions of years. Your view, as mathematically improbable as it is, can be held. It, to me, isn't very reasonable, but it can be held.
 

cncmin

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
17,956
Reaction score
2,172
Points
113
Despite what they claim, Conservatives only support states rights on issues they support. If they could ever move beyond that blatant hypocrisy I would be much more apt to support them.
This is a huge part of the problem. I haven't see a Republican yet yearn for any less than federal control over a state policy they didn't like. Republicans only claim to be for states' rights. They couldn't even accept state certifications of correct election results that went against the result they favored. Republicans of this era are all about full control of their ideology over everyone else, even if that everyone else is the majority, which is both anti-democratic and anti-freedom.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
47,483
Reaction score
2,965
Points
113
All of those things that you listed are awesome and positive contributions to society (and thank you for being a part of that). I have Evangelical friends who are some of the very best all-around people I know. So please don't think I'm knocking individual aspects of Evangelicals.

My point is solely the exposed and dangerous political position Evangelicals have put us in by their predisposition to readily accept misinformation and be fooled by political scoundrels and misfits, and the terrible effects those have on the long-term stability of this great country. I want to be part of building this country with my Evangelical, Baptist, Catholic, protestant, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, agnostic, and atheist brothers and sisters. But we can't build it properly when certain folks are too busy believing in and actively acting on garbage that divides us and tears us apart.
It would be amusing to hear how you’d like to build this country if you could get evangelicals to listen to you.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
47,483
Reaction score
2,965
Points
113
This is a huge part of the problem. I haven't see a Republican yet yearn for any less than federal control over a state policy they didn't like. Republicans only claim to be for states' rights. They couldn't even accept state certifications of correct election results that went against the result they favored. Republicans of this era are all about full control of their ideology over everyone else, even if that everyone else is the majority, which is both anti-democratic and anti-freedom.
There’s of course a lot of truth here. And yet you have a gigantic blind spot.
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
9,564
Reaction score
1,253
Points
113
This is a huge part of the problem. I haven't see a Republican yet yearn for any less than federal control over a state policy they didn't like. Republicans only claim to be for states' rights. They couldn't even accept state certifications of correct election results that went against the result they favored. Republicans of this era are all about full control of their ideology over everyone else, even if that everyone else is the majority, which is both anti-democratic and anti-freedom.
Except that Ben Sasse is a true Constitutionalist, which means the States have their rights and the Central, Federal government has its rights. The abuse of the Federal government on States is that the Federal government bullies States by threatening withholding of money unless States comply. This blackmail has been tolerated by both Democrats and Republicans in the Executive Branch.
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
9,564
Reaction score
1,253
Points
113
It would be amusing to hear how you’d like to build this country if you could get evangelicals to listen to you.
cncmin echos a prosperity now utopian construct, which interestingly is the same end game of the people he bemoans. Historically, this mindset comes from the Enlightenment as well as Anabaptist pietists who both set out to create a utopia on earth.
 
Top Bottom