| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Cary Kittrell" |
| Date: |
06 May 2005 01:24:28 PM |
| Object: |
Re: Evolution of the Heart |
In article <1115402614.642599.104480@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> "Everfresh" <kands00@hotmail.com> writes:
If you reject God, you will gradually lose wisdom, self-control, love,
and joy.
Uh oh...
When may I expect all this dreary disintegration begin? Any day now?
I ask, because I'm forty or so years into what you, I imagine, would
consider "rejecting God", and not only do I find the world more
beautiful and joyously wonderous as time goes by, I also notice
that I seem less and less concerned with myself, and more detached.
Silly me, I just assumed all this was a natural consequence of aging.
Those that reject religious union with others will seek to
fulfill selfish motives, at the expense of all others. Marriage, being
a reduction in personal freedom and a commitment to put another first,
will be rejected or ignored to fulfill sexual lust (which is why
Europe's birth rate is so low and multiple sexual partners are common).
Odd, then, that so many folks I know on the `alt.atheism' newsgroup are
married.
Incidentally, when you're an agricultural society, lots of kids is a
good thing. When you're a goods-and-services society, that's no longer true.
This will cause less reproduction. As even Hobbes points out, this
selfish drive will destroy society if not controlled by political
force.
And as Malthus pointed out, uncontrolled reproduction will destroy
us.
(so far, of course, we've managed to avoid this, mainly by destroying
thousands of other species to appropriate their resources for ourselves)
If one accepts Jesus, they will gain peace of mind, supernatural life,
discipline and control, and love for their fellow man. Not only will
they have less selfishness, but they will give each other help in times
of suffering. Because they are not driven by lusts, they spend more
time developing themselves. In short, they will evolve into a NEW
CREATION.
Which group do you think are more fit to survive?
The one in which evolution has a achieved a finely-tuned balance
of altruism and self-sufficiency. In other words: both groups.
-- cary
.
|
|
| User: "Everfresh" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution of the Heart |
06 May 2005 01:43:16 PM |
|
|
If one accepts Jesus, they will gain peace of mind, supernatural
life,
discipline and control, and love for their fellow man. Not only
will
they have less selfishness, but they will give each other help in
times
of suffering. Because they are not driven by lusts, they spend
more
time developing themselves. In short, they will evolve into a NEW
CREATION.
Which group do you think are more fit to survive?
The one in which evolution has a achieved a finely-tuned balance
of altruism and self-sufficiency. In other words: both groups.
I'll also note that you ignore the survival of the fittest concept of
evolution. If you are saying both groups will survive (not the
strongest) you undermine your whole evolutionary structure.
Ken Clifton
http://providential-plan.com/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob LeChevalier" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution of the Heart |
06 May 2005 02:46:32 PM |
|
|
"Everfresh" <kands00@hotmail.com> wrote:
The one in which evolution has a achieved a finely-tuned balance
of altruism and self-sufficiency. In other words: both groups.
I'll also note that you ignore the survival of the fittest concept of
evolution. If you are saying both groups will survive (not the
strongest) you undermine your whole evolutionary structure.
You think that only because you haven't a clue what evolutionary
theory says. Hint: "survival of the fittest" is a misstatement of
evolutionary theory in the first place. 2nd Hint: Evolutionary
theory applies to species, and not to social groups.
lojbab
--
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier, Founder, The Logical Language Group
(Opinions are my own; I do not speak for the organization.)
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution of the Heart |
06 May 2005 01:48:39 PM |
|
|
In article <1115404996.279744.119330@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> "Everfresh" <kands00@hotmail.com> writes:
If one accepts Jesus, they will gain peace of mind, supernatural
life,
discipline and control, and love for their fellow man. Not only
will
they have less selfishness, but they will give each other help in
times
of suffering. Because they are not driven by lusts, they spend
more
time developing themselves. In short, they will evolve into a NEW
CREATION.
Which group do you think are more fit to survive?
The one in which evolution has a achieved a finely-tuned balance
of altruism and self-sufficiency. In other words: both groups.
I'll also note that you ignore the survival of the fittest concept of
evolution. If you are saying both groups will survive (not the
strongest) you undermine your whole evolutionary structure.
<sigh>...
I don't "ignore" the "survival of the fittest" concept, I understand it.
You, on the other hand...
Let's try a simple example: which toad is more fitted to survive
in the desert: the Colorado River toad or the Spadefoot toad?
And which toad has therefore become extinct as a consquence?
-- cary
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution of the Heart |
06 May 2005 02:08:14 PM |
|
|
In our last episode
<1115404996.279744.119330@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>, Everfresh
pirouetted gracefully and with great fanfare proclaimed:
If one accepts Jesus, they will gain peace of mind, supernatural
life,
discipline and control, and love for their fellow man. Not only
will
they have less selfishness, but they will give each other help in
times
of suffering. Because they are not driven by lusts, they spend
more
time developing themselves. In short, they will evolve into a NEW
CREATION.
Which group do you think are more fit to survive?
The one in which evolution has a achieved a finely-tuned balance of
altruism and self-sufficiency. In other words: both groups.
I'll also note that you ignore the survival of the fittest concept of
evolution. If you are saying both groups will survive (not the strongest)
you undermine your whole evolutionary structure.
Wrong.
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
Group website at: http://www.alt-atheism.org
-----------------------------------------------------------
"Religion is regarded by the common people as true,
by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful."
-- Seneca the Younger
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Everfresh" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution of the Heart |
06 May 2005 01:40:08 PM |
|
|
Cary Kittrell wrote:
In article <1115402614.642599.104480@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>
"Everfresh" <kands00@hotmail.com> writes:
If you reject God, you will gradually lose wisdom, self-control,
love,
and joy.
Uh oh...
When may I expect all this dreary disintegration begin? Any day now?
I ask, because I'm forty or so years into what you, I imagine, would
consider "rejecting God", and not only do I find the world more
beautiful and joyously wonderous as time goes by, I also notice
that I seem less and less concerned with myself, and more detached.
Silly me, I just assumed all this was a natural consequence of aging.
Those that reject religious union with others will seek to
fulfill selfish motives, at the expense of all others. Marriage,
being
a reduction in personal freedom and a commitment to put another
first,
will be rejected or ignored to fulfill sexual lust (which is why
Europe's birth rate is so low and multiple sexual partners are
common).
Odd, then, that so many folks I know on the `alt.atheism' newsgroup
are
married.
Incidentally, when you're an agricultural society, lots of kids is a
good thing. When you're a goods-and-services society, that's no
longer true.
This will cause less reproduction. As even Hobbes points out,
this
selfish drive will destroy society if not controlled by political
force.
And as Malthus pointed out, uncontrolled reproduction will destroy
us.
(so far, of course, we've managed to avoid this, mainly by destroying
thousands of other species to appropriate their resources for
ourselves)
If one accepts Jesus, they will gain peace of mind, supernatural
life,
discipline and control, and love for their fellow man. Not only
will
they have less selfishness, but they will give each other help in
times
of suffering. Because they are not driven by lusts, they spend
more
time developing themselves. In short, they will evolve into a NEW
CREATION.
Which group do you think are more fit to survive?
The one in which evolution has a achieved a finely-tuned balance
of altruism and self-sufficiency. In other words: both groups.
So you admit atheists cannot survive without the religious. Thank you
for proving my point.
Ken Clifton
http://providential-plan.com/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Loose Cannon" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution of the Heart |
06 May 2005 02:20:14 PM |
|
|
Confused Internet Evangelist "Everfresh" <kands00@hotmail.com> wrote in
message
news:1115404808.638442.186000@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Cary Kittrell wrote:
In article <1115402614.642599.104480@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>
"Everfresh" <kands00@hotmail.com> writes:
If you reject God, you will gradually lose wisdom, self-control,
love, and joy.
Uh oh...
When may I expect all this dreary disintegration begin? Any day now?
I ask, because I'm forty or so years into what you, I imagine, would
consider "rejecting God", and not only do I find the world more
beautiful and joyously wonderous as time goes by, I also notice
that I seem less and less concerned with myself, and more detached.
Silly me, I just assumed all this was a natural consequence of aging.
Those that reject religious union with others will seek to
fulfill selfish motives, at the expense of all others. Marriage,
being a reduction in personal freedom and a commitment to put another
first, will be rejected or ignored to fulfill sexual lust (which is why
Europe's birth rate is so low and multiple sexual partners are
common).
Odd, then, that so many folks I know on the `alt.atheism' newsgroup
are married.
Incidentally, when you're an agricultural society, lots of kids is a
good thing. When you're a goods-and-services society, that's no longer
true.
This will cause less reproduction. As even Hobbes points out,
this selfish drive will destroy society if not controlled by political
force.
And as Malthus pointed out, uncontrolled reproduction will destroy
us.
(so far, of course, we've managed to avoid this, mainly by destroying
thousands of other species to appropriate their resources for
ourselves)
If one accepts Jesus, they will gain peace of mind, supernatural
life, discipline and control, and love for their fellow man. Not only
will they have less selfishness, but they will give each other help in
times of suffering. Because they are not driven by lusts, they spend
more time developing themselves. In short, they will evolve into a NEW
CREATION.
Which group do you think are more fit to survive?
The one in which evolution has a achieved a finely-tuned balance
of altruism and self-sufficiency. In other words: both groups.
So you admit atheists cannot survive without the religious.
Errr, Earth to Rev. Ken? Exactly *how* did you extrapolate that 'lil nugget
from the response given?
Thank you for proving my point.
You had a point?
LC~ Rev. Ken is further proof that Internet Evangelist = unemployed loser.
"A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove
anything." ~ Friedrich Nietzsche
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution of the Heart |
06 May 2005 02:29:50 PM |
|
|
In article <OrPee.6652$GQ5.1806@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net> "Loose Cannon" <looseain't@this.com> writes:
Confused Internet Evangelist "Everfresh" <kands00@hotmail.com> wrote in
message
news:1115404808.638442.186000@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Cary Kittrell wrote:
In article <1115402614.642599.104480@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>
"Everfresh" <kands00@hotmail.com> writes:
{...}
Which group do you think are more fit to survive?
The one in which evolution has a achieved a finely-tuned balance
of altruism and self-sufficiency. In other words: both groups.
So you admit atheists cannot survive without the religious.
Errr, Earth to Rev. Ken? Exactly *how* did you extrapolate that 'lil nugget
from the response given?
I think that must have been a sudden burst of reading incomprehension,
seeing that his interpretation was fully orthoginal to what I wrote.
With apologies to Pauli, "That's not even wrong".
-- cary
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution of the Heart |
06 May 2005 01:44:17 PM |
|
|
In article <1115404808.638442.186000@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> "Everfresh" <kands00@hotmail.com> writes:
Cary Kittrell wrote:
In article <1115402614.642599.104480@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>
"Everfresh" <kands00@hotmail.com> writes:
If you reject God, you will gradually lose wisdom, self-control,
love,
and joy.
Uh oh...
When may I expect all this dreary disintegration begin? Any day now?
I ask, because I'm forty or so years into what you, I imagine, would
consider "rejecting God", and not only do I find the world more
beautiful and joyously wonderous as time goes by, I also notice
that I seem less and less concerned with myself, and more detached.
Silly me, I just assumed all this was a natural consequence of aging.
Those that reject religious union with others will seek to
fulfill selfish motives, at the expense of all others. Marriage,
being
a reduction in personal freedom and a commitment to put another
first,
will be rejected or ignored to fulfill sexual lust (which is why
Europe's birth rate is so low and multiple sexual partners are
common).
Odd, then, that so many folks I know on the `alt.atheism' newsgroup
are
married.
Incidentally, when you're an agricultural society, lots of kids is a
good thing. When you're a goods-and-services society, that's no
longer true.
This will cause less reproduction. As even Hobbes points out,
this
selfish drive will destroy society if not controlled by political
force.
And as Malthus pointed out, uncontrolled reproduction will destroy
us.
(so far, of course, we've managed to avoid this, mainly by destroying
thousands of other species to appropriate their resources for
ourselves)
If one accepts Jesus, they will gain peace of mind, supernatural
life,
discipline and control, and love for their fellow man. Not only
will
they have less selfishness, but they will give each other help in
times
of suffering. Because they are not driven by lusts, they spend
more
time developing themselves. In short, they will evolve into a NEW
CREATION.
Which group do you think are more fit to survive?
The one in which evolution has a achieved a finely-tuned balance
of altruism and self-sufficiency. In other words: both groups.
So you admit atheists cannot survive without the religious. Thank you
for proving my point.
Actually, I admitted that either group could survive without the
other.
Read much?
-- cary
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution of the Heart |
06 May 2005 02:08:35 PM |
|
|
In our last episode
<1115404808.638442.186000@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>, Everfresh
pirouetted gracefully and with great fanfare proclaimed:
Cary Kittrell wrote:
In article <1115402614.642599.104480@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>
"Everfresh" <kands00@hotmail.com> writes:
If you reject God, you will gradually lose wisdom, self-control,
love,
and joy.
Uh oh...
When may I expect all this dreary disintegration begin? Any day now?
I ask, because I'm forty or so years into what you, I imagine, would
consider "rejecting God", and not only do I find the world more
beautiful and joyously wonderous as time goes by, I also notice that I
seem less and less concerned with myself, and more detached. Silly me, I
just assumed all this was a natural consequence of aging.
Those that reject religious union with others will seek to fulfill
selfish motives, at the expense of all others. Marriage,
being
a reduction in personal freedom and a commitment to put another
first,
will be rejected or ignored to fulfill sexual lust (which is why
Europe's birth rate is so low and multiple sexual partners are
common).
Odd, then, that so many folks I know on the `alt.atheism' newsgroup
are
married.
Incidentally, when you're an agricultural society, lots of kids is a
good thing. When you're a goods-and-services society, that's no
longer true.
This will cause less reproduction. As even Hobbes points out,
this
selfish drive will destroy society if not controlled by political
force.
And as Malthus pointed out, uncontrolled reproduction will destroy us.
(so far, of course, we've managed to avoid this, mainly by destroying
thousands of other species to appropriate their resources for
ourselves)
If one accepts Jesus, they will gain peace of mind, supernatural
life,
discipline and control, and love for their fellow man. Not only
will
they have less selfishness, but they will give each other help in
times
of suffering. Because they are not driven by lusts, they spend
more
time developing themselves. In short, they will evolve into a NEW
CREATION.
Which group do you think are more fit to survive?
The one in which evolution has a achieved a finely-tuned balance of
altruism and self-sufficiency. In other words: both groups.
So you admit atheists cannot survive without the religious. Thank you for
proving my point.
Wrong.
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
Group website at: http://www.alt-atheism.org
-----------------------------------------------------------
"Religion is regarded by the common people as true,
by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful."
-- Seneca the Younger
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution of the Heart |
11 May 2005 10:54:53 AM |
|
|
On 6 May 2005 11:40:08 -0700, "Everfresh" <kands00@hotmail.com> wrote:
Oh, looky! The brainless dingleberry's back and drooling nothing
sane.
[]
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
OT: A Change of Heart in Tehran? Is It Time to Talk?
Apocalyptic rebel movement revisits Congo's heart of darkness
Bush AWOL, Cheney AWOL, DeLay AWOL, Clark Purple Heart (Al Gore smoked dope, Bush served, Wesley Clark murdered women & children at Waco)
HEART ATTACK DURING 'PASSION OF CHRIST'
OT: As Violence Escalates, Some Changes of Heart on War
Their Beliefs are Bonkers, but they are at the Heart of Power
OT:Director's Heart Attack Blamed On 'Outrageous' Madonna
Heart of America
| Religious right fights science for the heart of America
Man Whores Heart AWOL Bush
OT: Belgium confronts its heart of darkness
Regulators OK Heart Medicine for Blacks
OT: Prayer 'no aid to heart patients'
Pentagon Calling Up Reservists Who Have Had Heart Attacks, cancer, hernias, in kidney dialysis, etc.
The crowned conqueror bent on conquest pierces Mack's heart with yet another arrow.
|
|
|
