AI-Jane Political, And Economic Forums

Full Version: Japanese Soldier Dies
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
I was wondering, at what point do folks like this face up to reality and how do they handle it? He believed the emperor was Japan's god and at the point he realized Japan had been defeated, I wonder if he lost his faith or what?

He refused to believe Japan could lose a war because of his religion until 1974.


http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/18/world/...pe=article
Always liked that guy! Crazy S.O.B.
By the same light, "I was wondering, at what point do folks like this face up to reality", that this planet is older than eleven thousand years?

The only difference was that he was given what he considered a lawful order, when he was young.

I guess its all an 'interpretation' sort of thing, isn't it? But you still have to admire his moxie.
(01-18-2014, 06:26 PM)John L Wrote: [ -> ]By the same light, "I was wondering, at what point do folks like this face up to reality", that this planet is older than eleven thousand years?

That is a point that always bothered me. I went to the church school and I have never ever met anyone that actually believed the plant was only a few thousand years old. It seems to me that atheists like people who have seen big foot are the only ones to come across that.
Paul, we have a regular founding member here, who fits that description.

And there are millions in the US who think that as well.
(01-18-2014, 06:43 PM)John L Wrote: [ -> ]Paul, we have a regular founding member here, who fits that description.

And there are millions in the US who think that as well.

Give this one a shot. It is the video that will make an evolutionists' head explode.

Just by looking at the title tells me more than I need to know. It is implicitly stating that it is impossible to believe in the Creator and Natural Selection together. This is the typical manner in which both extremes of issue use the "All or Nothing" approach, and the atheistic folks do the same thing as well. They both frame the issue as if there is no middle ground whatsoever.

As a physical anthropologist, and a Christian, I resent both sides telling me that I am not legit.

I am currently watching that British fellow, on the Science Channel, while working downstairs. And about an hour ago, the Brit was talking about how continents move apart slowly. And I thought back to how continental drift, or plate tectonics, worked in the Atlantic to cause both Americas to split away from Europe and Africa. And also the African Rift Valley, where it too is splitting away by a few inches each year. If the earth is only about eleven thousand years old, and these continents are moving away from each other by inches, how do the Creationists explain all this massive move in just a few thousand years and actually think they are using reason?

Same thing with Atheists. How is it that we as a species have an ingrain built-in genetic propensity for religion? Did it just happen one day? And if so, how and why? And why are these very same atheists doing their level best to create a heaven on earth here on planet earth? Why do they tend to subscribe to the religion of Environmentalism, as Michael Crichton so astutely explained.



But we have been over this many, many times in the recent past. If you look closely, you will easily find some of it. I really need to change the subject, and not get started on something I am so passionate about. S5
John,

I ran across an article a short while ago answering your question to atheists about built in religious impulses.

It stipulated that "evolution" created this desire for "god" because humanity needed that early on, now that we've evolved, we don't, so evolution now will shed the religious impulse in our genes.

Problem with his view is, evolution sure seems to know a whole lot of futuristic data like God would. The author was treading awful close to acknowledging a creator/director above human skillsets.
Evolution is a funny thing when discussed among the leftists. Laws can be passed to forbid the breeding of animals that have innate violent or predatory instincts. Somehow, homo-sapiens are immune to hereditary instincts. For some strange reason the laws of nature skip homo-sapiens and they are only subject to leftist dogma.
Paul, have you looked at that thread I put out in the General Resources Section, entitled "The KinderGarden of Eden: How The Modern Liberal Thinks (And Why He's Convinced That Ignorance Is Bliss)"? This guy Evan Sayet, has nailed it on the head, about why Leftists may be brilliant IQ wise, but not have a lick of common sense. They may occupy mature, adult bodies, but they have adolescent brains that never fully matured. They may make great physics professors, even own a company that leads the world in computer software, or a host of other things that require high intelligence. But when it comes to the ability to use this intelligence in the application of wisdom, they are simply incapable of doing such.

Mr. Sayet is one of a handful of Ashkenazis, who is able to apply common sense. The overwhelming majority of Ashkenazi Jews are dedicated Leftists, just as Einstein thought the solution was socialism. They can develop nuclear bombs, become doctors, lawyers, rocket scientists, but none of this requires understanding how humans do things. They haven't a clue, because they are still applying all that childhood utopian mentality that they learned in kindergarden.

You have to go there and read what he has to say. There's even one or two videos. I highly recommend it, and the light will go on when you do. They are people who have just not mentally grown up along with their bodies. Some eventually mature into understanding wisdom, but many never get out of the state they are in.
The present rate of continental drift has slowed way down. It was much faster during and for the first few hundred years following the immense global catastophe of the Flood, which involved bombardment by many huge cosmic impactors. That is what supplied the energy for the crustal expansion we call continental drift. Naturally, such things tend to wind down as time goes by.

And I object that the vast, vast majority of the solid scientific evidence does support the YEYU Creationist view that the earth and universe are no more than 12,000 years old. Holders of the traditional evolutionary fantasy simply lack the guts and honesty to face up to the demonstrable, provable truth.
That's what I thought you would say Ron. Its the only way to explain things from your corner. And naturally there is evidence, as in tree ring chronology, that the process has slowed down, right?

Too bad its based entirely upon faith, no matter how problematic. But that's ok. Fortunately the overwhelming majority of Christians don't subscribe to it.

But my main issue is Liberty, and you have the liberty to your beliefs too. So I totally support your right to your faith. I just don't agree with it, that's all. S5
Paul hasn't been exposed to the US "fundy" church. It interprets the bible w/o reference to it's original audience's understandings and it casts it's notions onto the text( most of us do that though).
Patrick, the texts have profound meaning to me as well. But like anything, interpretation also changes, when translated from one to another language. I have no problem with acknowledging that basically there is truth to what it says, but being dogmatically strict and refusing to acknowledge human inability to use perfect rote, seems to be stretching logic a bit.
No tree rings go back more than a couple of thousand years--even in the case of the Bristlecone Pines.

When the Genesis narrative uses such plain expressions as "The evening and the morning were the first day...." (etc.) it would seem that creative re-interpretation is required to get anything other than literal meaning out of it.

You may claim that Moses and other Biblical writers were just confused and steeped in ignorance. But the fourth commandment was written by the finger of God Himself. It is the Creator Himself who gave as the reason for observing the Sabbath on the seventh day of the week: "For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it." (Exodus 20:11; NKJV)
(01-19-2014, 08:06 PM)Ron Lambert Wrote: [ -> ]No tree rings go back more than a couple of thousand years--even in the case of the Bristlecone Pines.

That is not the point I was making to you Ron. The point is that tree rings, just like stratigraphy, is made up of layers. And where one can read the rings on a tree and understand the climate, length of growing season, amount of rainfall, etc, etc, the same thing applies with geology. Each layer tells something that is scientifically able to reveal a great deal of data.

You(second person plural) conveniently turn your backs on all this date because it clearly shows the earth to be far older than you obtain from the old testament. And you can attempt to read the extremely sketchy biblical tea leaves and pronounce judgment that something is the gosple, and omit all this data if you wish. But you are choosing to selectively see only what you want to see.

But that is your liberty to do such. If you wish to keep your intellectual head in the sand, help yourself. You can quote scriptures 'til the cows come home. You've already got your mind made up.
(01-18-2014, 06:26 PM)John L Wrote: [ -> ]By the same light, "I was wondering, at what point do folks like this face up to reality", that this planet is older than eleven thousand years?

The only difference was that he was given what he considered a lawful order, when he was young.

I guess its all an 'interpretation' sort of thing, isn't it? But you still have to admire his moxie.

John, you know better than to mention religion.

That is how threads go from a Japanese soldier adhering to Bushido code of honor, to crackpot theories that Earth's entire history is recounted in the bible, with the proof being rings of a pine tree. I could offer science to no end, but no matter what, *someone* will counter it with religious bullshit.

I believe in God, but I am also about to be a Geologist. We're not bullshitting you when we tell you the Earth is more than six thousands years old. We don't fuck around and we're not harboring any agendas. We're just blue collar folk in a science job looking at cool stuff.
I know. I'm ashamed of myself, because it accomplishes nothing of substance. I'll stop it. S11

At least here anyway.
It's ok, John. It took me a long time to learn my lesson, and I am still learning it. Now I avoid mentioning anything of religious dogmas as much as I can. One slip is all it takes though.

Anyhow, I am not going to sit like some armchair warrior or basement dwelling philosopher and critique the merits of this soldier's decision to do as he did. I am only going to admire him for adhering to the code of honor of his country as a soldier and patriot.
When I find the Evolution thread I do want to bang heads. Evolution seems to me very likely but the fossil record offers absolutely no evidence of transition from one species to another. In the absence of the theory of evolution the fossil records offer evidence of sudden materialization of distinct species, dying out only to suddenly be replaced with the emergence of new distinct species. However; I think the topic of evolution is really covered by the Hillary Clinton "What difference does it make", as if it is true more than millennia are involved in orders of magnitude.

Actually I am very interested in the possible crossing of bloodlines of the various bipedal hominids. The true first humans in the Americas, etc, etc...
Pages: 1 2