Bible's view of the cosmos: flat earth, moving sun. People actually buy into this?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-11-2015, 06:54 PM
RE: Bible's view of the cosmos: flat earth, moving sun. People actually buy into this?
(06-11-2015 06:43 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Damn I have the memory of a fish.




#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like GirlyMan's post
06-11-2015, 07:10 PM
RE: Bible's view of the cosmos: flat earth, moving sun. People actually buy into this?
(06-11-2015 06:46 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  
(06-11-2015 06:43 PM)Old Man Marsh Wrote:  No, the country was founded because the Articles of Confederation were inadequate. The colonies were founded and populated because Europe was running out of lumber and fur.
Didn't say why. Said on what principals.

Apparently the principle of Finders-Keepers. Goes in hand with Jeepers-Creepers.








Don't let those gnomes and their illusions get you down. They're just gnomes and illusions.

--Jake the Dog, Adventure Time

Alouette, je te plumerai.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Old Man Marsh's post
06-11-2015, 07:14 PM
RE: Bible's view of the cosmos: flat earth, moving sun. People actually buy into this?
(06-11-2015 06:38 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  
(06-11-2015 05:23 PM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  Pops - Go look it up, please. You're talking out of your ass.

Pledge was written in 1892 (by a Baptist preacher). It did not say "under God" until 1954. Try to figure out why that might be so. It was around the same time that the national motto was changed from "out of many, one" (E Pluribus Unum) to "In God We Trust". Again, see if you can reach for some of that history or at least some Google Fu, and figure out why that might have been.
So our money didn't always say" in God we trust"?

Learn something new everyday.

This country was forged under the general belief in God though. Puritans, Quakers...ring a bell. Thanks for the history lesson for real.

Your are not United States, right? You're Australian or some of that. So where is this "our money" shit coming from?

However, no, the "under god" stuff is to distinguish USA from godless=communists (from the 1950s' attempts to enforce a standard of behavior equally as repressive as communism).
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like julep's post
06-11-2015, 07:20 PM
RE: Bible's view of the cosmos: flat earth, moving sun. People actually buy into this?
(06-11-2015 05:00 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  
(06-11-2015 04:11 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  If you cared about your message, you would be better off attempting to be learning how to spread it in ways that can make it spread. You don't have to be manipulative, and it's not like you're some pinnacle of complete dishonesty.

How many times do you ignore direct questions, constantly. Why do you do this? How many times have you gone on about positivity while countering that with the negative ranting hate filled comments. So you clearly neglect what you know is "right" all the time. You just apparently don't know how to communicate at any reasonable manner still, and aren't getting better at it because your just rather insist your way is right despite no evidence of a benefit to it here. Of course you don't really care for anything describable, just stick to what you feel is right to work through it. So how about it, why don't you answer direct questions all the time?
I really try to. Often times I don't see a lot of them. I get a notice if someone quotes me and I respond. Otherwise I most likely won't see the question. As far as answering things in a manner that seems evasive; my cognitive processes seem to be very different from those who discern all things as being of the physical. This oft times leads to a wide chasm between the two parties attempting communication. I am working to be more direct in my responses in terms that can be more readily discerned by whoever asked the question. I do agree that my endless ranting seems to affect some but not all. I am prepared to attempt to level with others in a more direct way that they can understand. Keep in mind that I am off in space more often than not. I am a poor communicator in general and always have been an outsider from society and even self so needless to say communicating in a manner that all can relate to and understand is a weakness of mine. I am a work in progress as we all are. Again, I will, as of now attempt to answer questions in like manner to which they were asked. Just remember to quote me if you want a response.
Lastly, all this is on a phone with limited viewing space and capacity done by someone who although at one point in life actually programmed and understood hardware, now is somewhat lost to the technological advancement of today's gadgets.

Hope that helped to explain just a little.

Peace.

I am a pretty shitty communicator, at least speaker, and am often on this forum or forums posting via phone as well. It's still a concept of accepting many things. I just think working to deal with people on their terms gets far better results, just as when or if I'm trying to send some type of message to a religious person, I work via their accepted values more than just repeat something over and over and over with no second guessing of it.

There is time and places to assert knowledge without claims to back it up and be fine with it. A skeptical inclined forum such as this isn't the place where that is going to be tolerated without negativity and highlights shone brightly upon that behavior.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ClydeLee's post
06-11-2015, 07:31 PM
RE: Bible's view of the cosmos: flat earth, moving sun. People actually buy into this?
(06-11-2015 06:38 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  This country was forged under the general belief in God though. Puritans, Quakers...ring a bell. Thanks for the history lesson for real.

Many of the early settlers were religious but the United States proper was founded as a secular nation. The US constitution defines the framework and it has 3 mentions of god:
1. restricting the government from establishing a religion or preventing people from exercising whatever religion they choose
2. prohibiting any religious test for holding public office
3. the date uses the conventional AD notation
That would not be the case if the founders had wanted to base it on religious belief.

By the way, the puritans came over for "religious freedom" but only in the sense that many US xians use it today -- they didn't like the fact that everybody else didn't agree with their beliefs so they went to the US to get away from other religions. Roger Williams got kicked out because he promoted freedom of religion and ended up found his own colony in Rhode Island as a place where any religion could be practiced and where he could implement church/state separation. He was more of a model for the US founding than the puritans were.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 7 users Like unfogged's post
06-11-2015, 08:56 PM
RE: Bible's view of the cosmos: flat earth, moving sun. People actually buy into this?
(06-11-2015 07:31 PM)unfogged Wrote:  
(06-11-2015 06:38 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  This country was forged under the general belief in God though. Puritans, Quakers...ring a bell. Thanks for the history lesson for real.

Many of the early settlers were religious but the United States proper was founded as a secular nation. The US constitution defines the framework and it has 3 mentions of god:
1. restricting the government from establishing a religion or preventing people from exercising whatever religion they choose
2. prohibiting any religious test for holding public office
3. the date uses the conventional AD notation
That would not be the case if the founders had wanted to base it on religious belief.

By the way, the puritans came over for "religious freedom" but only in the sense that many US xians use it today -- they didn't like the fact that everybody else didn't agree with their beliefs so they went to the US to get away from other religions. Roger Williams got kicked out because he promoted freedom of religion and ended up found his own colony in Rhode Island as a place where any religion could be practiced and where he could implement church/state separation. He was more of a model for the US founding than the puritans were.
Cool, again useful shit. I agree that government should be kept somewhat separate from religion due to the innumerable level of division of religion. It would be wartime all the time...uhm...never mind. Anyway.

Okay, so the founding fathers were majority of some sort of faith in God, right? They didn't let those things weigh in to the foundation for reasons of peace, equality and freedom, right?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes popsthebuilder's post
06-11-2015, 09:30 PM
RE: Bible's view of the cosmos: flat earth, moving sun. People actually buy into this?
(06-11-2015 10:31 AM)jason_delisle Wrote:  
(06-11-2015 10:00 AM)Clockwork Wrote:  That's what I've been wondering. From the horror stories of the military and religion, there seems to be less reason. In the civilian world, we don't find a priest or minister or our evangelical friends. Why would an atheist seek out a chaplain? Correct if I'm wrong but I don't think the military actively suggests atheists visit the chaplain.
Why would an atheist seek out a chaplain? There are plenty of reasons. Being a Captain in the Marine Corps and an officer in charge of over 100 Marines I have seen multiple occasions first hand where an atheist sought help from a chaplain at his own request. Tomorrow I am going to meet with one of my Marines who happens to be an atheist who is currently in ICU. We asked him if a chaplain would be of any help and he eagerly accepted.

I'd like to know if your time here affected your visitation with that marine.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Full Circle's post
06-11-2015, 09:39 PM
RE: Bible's view of the cosmos: flat earth, moving sun. People actually buy into this?
(06-11-2015 09:30 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  
(06-11-2015 10:31 AM)jason_delisle Wrote:  Why would an atheist seek out a chaplain? There are plenty of reasons. Being a Captain in the Marine Corps and an officer in charge of over 100 Marines I have seen multiple occasions first hand where an atheist sought help from a chaplain at his own request. Tomorrow I am going to meet with one of my Marines who happens to be an atheist who is currently in ICU. We asked him if a chaplain would be of any help and he eagerly accepted.

I'd like to know if your time here affected your visitation with that marine.
I will be meeting with him tomorrow. I will let you know. I honestly have to say I appreciate all the tough love I have received here. I will let everyone know how it goes.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes jason_delisle's post
06-11-2015, 09:41 PM
RE: Bible's view of the cosmos: flat earth, moving sun. People actually buy into this?
(06-11-2015 08:56 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  
(06-11-2015 07:31 PM)unfogged Wrote:  Many of the early settlers were religious but the United States proper was founded as a secular nation. The US constitution defines the framework and it has 3 mentions of god:
1. restricting the government from establishing a religion or preventing people from exercising whatever religion they choose
2. prohibiting any religious test for holding public office
3. the date uses the conventional AD notation
That would not be the case if the founders had wanted to base it on religious belief.

By the way, the puritans came over for "religious freedom" but only in the sense that many US xians use it today -- they didn't like the fact that everybody else didn't agree with their beliefs so they went to the US to get away from other religions. Roger Williams got kicked out because he promoted freedom of religion and ended up found his own colony in Rhode Island as a place where any religion could be practiced and where he could implement church/state separation. He was more of a model for the US founding than the puritans were.
Cool, again useful shit. I agree that government should be kept somewhat separate from religion due to the innumerable level of division of religion. It would be wartime all the time...uhm...never mind. Anyway.

Okay, so the founding fathers were majority of some sort of faith in God, right? They didn't let those things weigh in to the foundation for reasons of peace, equality and freedom, right?

Born in 81? I thought you were like 75 yo by the way you proudly display faith versus actual knowledge. Study a little history "pops"....there are LOTS of misconceptions out there...and why is that? religion.

Here is some things you may have missed out on in school...

While it is true that a few of the Founders (such as Thomas Paine) were deists, and that some of the Founders (such as Alexander Hamilton) were Christians, the majority of the Founders were somewhere in between. Their beliefs were, in fact, in line with something that is becoming increasingly described as theistic rationalism. Theistic rationalism is a belief system, not a religion.

Heard of the treaty of tripoli? Article 11 perhaps?

Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen [Muslims],—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan [Muslim] nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

According to Frank Lambert, Professor of History at Purdue University,

"By their actions, the Founding Fathers made clear that their primary concern was religious freedom, not the advancement of a state religion. Individuals, not the government, would define religious faith and practice in the United States. Thus the Founders ensured that in no official sense would America be a Christian Republic. Ten years after the Constitutional Convention ended its work, the country assured the world that the United States was a secular state, and that its negotiations would adhere to the rule of law, not the dictates of the Christian faith. The assurances were contained in the Treaty of Tripoli of 1797 and were intended to allay the fears of the Muslim state by insisting that religion would not govern how the treaty was interpreted and enforced. John Adams and the Senate made clear that the pact was between two sovereign states, not between two religious powers.

Original pledge of allegiance written in 1892 by Francis Bellamy, ""I pledge allegiance to my flag and the republic for which it stands, one nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

See mention of god anywhere?

Now a little history lesson.

The efforts to bring God into the state reached their peak during the so-called "religious revival" of the 1950s. It was a time when Norman Vincent Peale grafted religion onto the era's feel-good consumerism in his best-selling The Power of Positive Thinking; when Billy Graham rose to fame as a Red-baiter who warned that Americans would perish in a nuclear holocaust unless they embraced Jesus Christ; when Secretary of State John Foster Dulles believed that the United States should oppose communism not because the Soviet Union was a totalitarian regime but because its leaders were atheists.

Hand in hand with the Red Scare, to which it was inextricably linked, the new religiosity overran Washington. Politicians outbid one another to prove their piety. President Eisenhower inaugurated that Washington staple: the prayer breakfast. Congress created a prayer room in the Capitol. In 1955, with Ike's support, Congress added the words "In God We Trust" on all paper money. In 1956 it made the same four words the nation's official motto, replacing "E Pluribus Unum." Legislators introduced Constitutional amendments to state that Americans obeyed "the authority and law of Jesus Christ."

The campaign to add "under God" to the Pledge of Allegiance was part of this movement. It's unclear precisely where the idea originated, but one driving force was the Catholic fraternal society the Knights of Columbus. In the early '50s the Knights themselves adopted the God-infused pledge for use in their own meetings, and members bombarded Congress with calls for the United States to do the same. Other fraternal, religious, and veterans clubs backed the idea. In April 1953, Rep. Louis Rabaut, D-Mich., formally proposed the alteration of the pledge in a bill he introduced to Congress.

The "under God" movement didn't take off, however, until the next year, when it was endorsed by the Rev. George M. Docherty, the pastor of the Presbyterian church in Washington that Eisenhower attended. In February 1954, Docherty gave a sermon—with the president in the pew before him—arguing that apart from "the United States of America," the pledge "could be the pledge of any country." He added, "I could hear little Moscovites repeat a similar pledge to their hammer-and-sickle flag with equal solemnity." Perhaps forgetting that "liberty and justice for all" was not the norm in Moscow, Docherty urged the inclusion of "under God" in the pledge to denote what he felt was special about the United States.

In recent times, controversies over the pledge have centered on the wisdom of enforcing patriotism more than on its corruption from a secular oath into a religious one. In the 1988 presidential race, as many readers will recall, George Bush bludgeoned Democratic nominee Michael Dukakis for vetoing a mandatory-pledge bill when he was governor of Massachusetts, even though the state Supreme Court had ruled the bill unconstitutional. Surely one reason for the current cravenness of Democratic leaders is a fear of undergoing Dukakis' fate in 2002 or 2004 at the hands of another Bush.

The history of the pledge supports Goodwin's decision. The record of the 1954 act shows that, far from a "de minimis" reference or a mere "backdrop" devoid of meaning, the words "under God" were inserted in the pledge for the express purpose of endorsing religion—which the U.S. Supreme Court itself ruled in 1971 was unconstitutional. Also according to the Supreme Court's own rulings, it doesn't matter that students are allowed to refrain from saying the pledge; a 2000 high court opinion held that voluntary, student-led prayers at school football games are unconstitutionally "coercive," because they force students into an unacceptable position of either proclaiming religious beliefs they don't share or publicly protesting.

The appeals court decision came almost 40 years to the day after the Supreme Court decision in Engel v. Vitale. In that case, the court ruled it unconstitutional for public schools to allow prayer, even though the prayer was non-denominational and students were allowed abstain from the exercise. When asked about the unpopular decision, President John F. Kennedy replied coolly that he knew many people were angry, but that the decisions of the court had to be respected. He added that there was "a very easy remedy"—not a constitutional amendment but a renewed commitment by Americans to pray at home, in their churches, and with their families.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_p...iance.html

Isn't google wonderful? Look at you learning shit.

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 7 users Like goodwithoutgod's post
06-11-2015, 09:50 PM
RE: Bible's view of the cosmos: flat earth, moving sun. People actually buy into this?
(06-11-2015 09:41 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  
(06-11-2015 08:56 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Cool, again useful shit. I agree that government should be kept somewhat separate from religion due to the innumerable level of division of religion. It would be wartime all the time...uhm...never mind. Anyway.

Okay, so the founding fathers were majority of some sort of faith in God, right? They didn't let those things weigh in to the foundation for reasons of peace, equality and freedom, right?

Born in 81? I thought you were like 75 yo by the way you proudly display faith versus actual knowledge. Study a little history "pops"....there are LOTS of misconceptions out there...and why is that? religion.

Here is some things you may have missed out on in school...

While it is true that a few of the Founders (such as Thomas Paine) were deists, and that some of the Founders (such as Alexander Hamilton) were Christians, the majority of the Founders were somewhere in between. Their beliefs were, in fact, in line with something that is becoming increasingly described as theistic rationalism. Theistic rationalism is a belief system, not a religion.

Heard of the treaty of tripoli? Article 11 perhaps?

Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen [Muslims],—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan [Muslim] nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

According to Frank Lambert, Professor of History at Purdue University,

"By their actions, the Founding Fathers made clear that their primary concern was religious freedom, not the advancement of a state religion. Individuals, not the government, would define religious faith and practice in the United States. Thus the Founders ensured that in no official sense would America be a Christian Republic. Ten years after the Constitutional Convention ended its work, the country assured the world that the United States was a secular state, and that its negotiations would adhere to the rule of law, not the dictates of the Christian faith. The assurances were contained in the Treaty of Tripoli of 1797 and were intended to allay the fears of the Muslim state by insisting that religion would not govern how the treaty was interpreted and enforced. John Adams and the Senate made clear that the pact was between two sovereign states, not between two religious powers.

Original pledge of allegiance written in 1892 by Francis Bellamy, ""I pledge allegiance to my flag and the republic for which it stands, one nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

See mention of god anywhere?

Now a little history lesson.

The efforts to bring God into the state reached their peak during the so-called "religious revival" of the 1950s. It was a time when Norman Vincent Peale grafted religion onto the era's feel-good consumerism in his best-selling The Power of Positive Thinking; when Billy Graham rose to fame as a Red-baiter who warned that Americans would perish in a nuclear holocaust unless they embraced Jesus Christ; when Secretary of State John Foster Dulles believed that the United States should oppose communism not because the Soviet Union was a totalitarian regime but because its leaders were atheists.

Hand in hand with the Red Scare, to which it was inextricably linked, the new religiosity overran Washington. Politicians outbid one another to prove their piety. President Eisenhower inaugurated that Washington staple: the prayer breakfast. Congress created a prayer room in the Capitol. In 1955, with Ike's support, Congress added the words "In God We Trust" on all paper money. In 1956 it made the same four words the nation's official motto, replacing "E Pluribus Unum." Legislators introduced Constitutional amendments to state that Americans obeyed "the authority and law of Jesus Christ."

The campaign to add "under God" to the Pledge of Allegiance was part of this movement. It's unclear precisely where the idea originated, but one driving force was the Catholic fraternal society the Knights of Columbus. In the early '50s the Knights themselves adopted the God-infused pledge for use in their own meetings, and members bombarded Congress with calls for the United States to do the same. Other fraternal, religious, and veterans clubs backed the idea. In April 1953, Rep. Louis Rabaut, D-Mich., formally proposed the alteration of the pledge in a bill he introduced to Congress.

The "under God" movement didn't take off, however, until the next year, when it was endorsed by the Rev. George M. Docherty, the pastor of the Presbyterian church in Washington that Eisenhower attended. In February 1954, Docherty gave a sermon—with the president in the pew before him—arguing that apart from "the United States of America," the pledge "could be the pledge of any country." He added, "I could hear little Moscovites repeat a similar pledge to their hammer-and-sickle flag with equal solemnity." Perhaps forgetting that "liberty and justice for all" was not the norm in Moscow, Docherty urged the inclusion of "under God" in the pledge to denote what he felt was special about the United States.

In recent times, controversies over the pledge have centered on the wisdom of enforcing patriotism more than on its corruption from a secular oath into a religious one. In the 1988 presidential race, as many readers will recall, George Bush bludgeoned Democratic nominee Michael Dukakis for vetoing a mandatory-pledge bill when he was governor of Massachusetts, even though the state Supreme Court had ruled the bill unconstitutional. Surely one reason for the current cravenness of Democratic leaders is a fear of undergoing Dukakis' fate in 2002 or 2004 at the hands of another Bush.

The history of the pledge supports Goodwin's decision. The record of the 1954 act shows that, far from a "de minimis" reference or a mere "backdrop" devoid of meaning, the words "under God" were inserted in the pledge for the express purpose of endorsing religion—which the U.S. Supreme Court itself ruled in 1971 was unconstitutional. Also according to the Supreme Court's own rulings, it doesn't matter that students are allowed to refrain from saying the pledge; a 2000 high court opinion held that voluntary, student-led prayers at school football games are unconstitutionally "coercive," because they force students into an unacceptable position of either proclaiming religious beliefs they don't share or publicly protesting.

The appeals court decision came almost 40 years to the day after the Supreme Court decision in Engel v. Vitale. In that case, the court ruled it unconstitutional for public schools to allow prayer, even though the prayer was non-denominational and students were allowed abstain from the exercise. When asked about the unpopular decision, President John F. Kennedy replied coolly that he knew many people were angry, but that the decisions of the court had to be respected. He added that there was "a very easy remedy"—not a constitutional amendment but a renewed commitment by Americans to pray at home, in their churches, and with their families.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_p...iance.html

Isn't google wonderful? Look at you learning shit.
What was your point exactly?

Pretty sure I said Faith. Nothing to do with an organized religion per say. They had Faith and belief in a God. They didn't let it intervene with government and in some cases kept it secret. No one said they where Christians. Although I mentioned Quakers and Puritanism I didn't state that any particular founding father was of such Faith. They understood that division based on separate "religions" wasn't the truth. Good for them. Smart fellas.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: