The Lord's Believers - Alpha Centauri Forums

  Alpha Centauri Forums
  Old Test Forums
  The Lord's Believers

profile | register | prefs | faq | search

Author Topic:   The Lord's Believers

Steve Graber posted 11-19-98 04:48 PM ET
I saw the Alpha Centauri review on the GameSpot web page and I found this description of the Lord's Believers: "However, their creationist beliefs impede their scientific studies and their ability to deal with the planet's indigenous life." This statement is a strong insult to those of us who hold to the creationist view of origins. I would agree that, in many instances, religious fundamentalism has caused setbacks in science because of an unwillingness to search for the truth beyond the boundaries of what is currently understood. Galileo and Capernicus are good examples of this tension. Both of these men held creationist views and made incredible advances in science in their day, yet they both experienced persecution from the church because of their views.

I suggest that you re-write the description of the Lord's believers to avoid offending those who, after studying the scientific details carefully, have come to the conclusion that the creation view of origins is more consistant than the evolutionary view of origins.

Thank you for your consideration,
Steve Graber
North Canton, OH
Talon posted 11-19-98 05:06 PM ET
Ohio? That place doesn't exist! Obviously you are just a secret government agent of some sort.
-Talon
Imran Siddiqui posted 11-19-98 05:10 PM ET
I am religious, but I think the definition is adequate. In Civ2, fundamentalist gov't impeaded science. I assume so would the Lord's Believers, because they'd accept their teachings rather than science. Especially since I found out that they are Christian, not all monothestist. No offence, but the Christian dominated state in the Mid Ages impeaded science, while Islam and Judaism kept Greek and Roman knowledge alive.
Imran Siddiqui
Patriot
Imran Siddiqui posted 11-19-98 05:11 PM ET
I am religious, but I think the definition is adequate. In Civ2, fundamentalist gov't impeaded science. I assume so would the Lord's Believers, because they'd accept their teachings rather than science. Especially since I found out that they are Christian, not all monothestist. No offence, but the Christian dominated state in the Mid Ages impeaded science, while Islam and Judaism kept Greek and Roman knowledge alive.
Imran Siddiqui
Patriot
Grosshaus posted 11-19-98 05:21 PM ET
Of course there are people who believe in creation and are great scientists. But they are few. All the factions are based on an image of a group in our world. Like I'm a big fan of capitalism and I support many of the green ideals. Still I don't want a faction of green industrials. I don't believe anyone can find a faction that is 100% like his own beliefs and that's not the point. They are just stereotypes that are made totally different from each other.
And a religious culture has always been, and in my opinion will always be, quite conservative. And when the culture is conservative, then it's hard for people to come up with and spread the ideals of revolutionary technology and theories. For instance, religious fanatics near me have abandoned TV, because it spreads the word of Satan or something. Without TV they loose an important source of information. When they don't have TV's, they don't know the difference between video games and television programs. Also they think video games are computer games. So, computers are the same as TV and are prohibited. And how can one improve todays science without computers?
And don't get me wrong, I don't hate christianity or any other religions or the people who believe in them. I just hate any society that is based on them. Look at Afghanistan and Iran, read about the medieval Europe or Byzantium. You'll find those cultures just about the worse places for a man to live as a man is supposed to live: free!!!!!!
AUH20 posted 11-19-98 05:50 PM ET
Also, creationists may be dogmatic and refuse to study the xenobiology, the development of life on Chiron, and the creation of the Universe, et. al.
One question:
How can you reasonbly study science and advocate creationism?
DHE_X2 posted 11-19-98 06:01 PM ET
I believe that God created all, so I might be a creationist, but when the Bible says he created the world in six days (rested the seventh), I think that it was not meant to be take literally. Problems arise between science and religion when science tries to disprove the metaphysical, and religious doctrine is taken in the most literal sense.
DHE_X2 posted 11-19-98 06:03 PM ET
Sorry, forgot to post about the actual topic. The 7 factions have to be distinct and seperate. If we had all "middle of the road" factions, gameplay would be mundane and get old quickly. Though, there should be a faction editor, so you'll be able to create your own factions.
Steve Graber posted 11-24-98 10:12 AM ET
The view of creation origins holds that there is a supreme being who created the universe as we know it. Those who hold this view have differing time frames in which the creation has taken place, from 7 days to several millenia and more.
The view of evolutionary origins holds that there is no supreme being who created the universe and the universe as we know it has come about through random changes in the genetic pattern over millions+ of years. In this view of origins the 'universe' itself is the supreme being which caused all things to come into existance (the universe in this sense represents all of the known and unknown laws by which things are governed, such as the law of gravity, which is simply our interpretation of a real power that exists and controls the matter which exists in the universe).
From this description, I would put forward that the views of origins (creation and evolution) are identical except in 2 points:
1) The length of time which elapsed from the time of 'the beginning' and today. (What about before the beginning?)
2) What is the nature of the force which has brought about the universe as we know it today.
Is the force a personal supreme being who has purposes behind the development of the universe? (What is the origin of this supreme being? What is the purpose behind the creation?)
Is the force simply a set of physical and non physical laws which have no apparent long term purpose? (What is the origin of these laws? Are these laws changing as time passes?)
To close this thread, click here (moderator or admin only).


Hop to:

Contact Us | Alpha Centauri Home

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.18
© Madrona Park, Inc., 1998.

Author	Topic: The Lord's Believers
Steve Graber	posted 11-19-98 04:48 PM ET I saw the Alpha Centauri review on the GameSpot web page and I found this description of the Lord's Believers: "However, their creationist beliefs impede their scientific studies and their ability to deal with the planet's indigenous life." This statement is a strong insult to those of us who hold to the creationist view of origins. I would agree that, in many instances, religious fundamentalism has caused setbacks in science because of an unwillingness to search for the truth beyond the boundaries of what is currently understood. Galileo and Capernicus are good examples of this tension. Both of these men held creationist views and made incredible advances in science in their day, yet they both experienced persecution from the church because of their views. I suggest that you re-write the description of the Lord's believers to avoid offending those who, after studying the scientific details carefully, have come to the conclusion that the creation view of origins is more consistant than the evolutionary view of origins. Thank you for your consideration, Steve Graber North Canton, OH
Talon	posted 11-19-98 05:06 PM ET Ohio? That place doesn't exist! Obviously you are just a secret government agent of some sort. -Talon
Imran Siddiqui	posted 11-19-98 05:10 PM ET I am religious, but I think the definition is adequate. In Civ2, fundamentalist gov't impeaded science. I assume so would the Lord's Believers, because they'd accept their teachings rather than science. Especially since I found out that they are Christian, not all monothestist. No offence, but the Christian dominated state in the Mid Ages impeaded science, while Islam and Judaism kept Greek and Roman knowledge alive. Imran Siddiqui Patriot
Imran Siddiqui	posted 11-19-98 05:11 PM ET I am religious, but I think the definition is adequate. In Civ2, fundamentalist gov't impeaded science. I assume so would the Lord's Believers, because they'd accept their teachings rather than science. Especially since I found out that they are Christian, not all monothestist. No offence, but the Christian dominated state in the Mid Ages impeaded science, while Islam and Judaism kept Greek and Roman knowledge alive. Imran Siddiqui Patriot
Grosshaus	posted 11-19-98 05:21 PM ET Of course there are people who believe in creation and are great scientists. But they are few. All the factions are based on an image of a group in our world. Like I'm a big fan of capitalism and I support many of the green ideals. Still I don't want a faction of green industrials. I don't believe anyone can find a faction that is 100% like his own beliefs and that's not the point. They are just stereotypes that are made totally different from each other. And a religious culture has always been, and in my opinion will always be, quite conservative. And when the culture is conservative, then it's hard for people to come up with and spread the ideals of revolutionary technology and theories. For instance, religious fanatics near me have abandoned TV, because it spreads the word of Satan or something. Without TV they loose an important source of information. When they don't have TV's, they don't know the difference between video games and television programs. Also they think video games are computer games. So, computers are the same as TV and are prohibited. And how can one improve todays science without computers? And don't get me wrong, I don't hate christianity or any other religions or the people who believe in them. I just hate any society that is based on them. Look at Afghanistan and Iran, read about the medieval Europe or Byzantium. You'll find those cultures just about the worse places for a man to live as a man is supposed to live: free!!!!!!
AUH20	posted 11-19-98 05:50 PM ET Also, creationists may be dogmatic and refuse to study the xenobiology, the development of life on Chiron, and the creation of the Universe, et. al. One question: How can you reasonbly study science and advocate creationism?
DHE_X2	posted 11-19-98 06:01 PM ET I believe that God created all, so I might be a creationist, but when the Bible says he created the world in six days (rested the seventh), I think that it was not meant to be take literally. Problems arise between science and religion when science tries to disprove the metaphysical, and religious doctrine is taken in the most literal sense.
DHE_X2	posted 11-19-98 06:03 PM ET Sorry, forgot to post about the actual topic. The 7 factions have to be distinct and seperate. If we had all "middle of the road" factions, gameplay would be mundane and get old quickly. Though, there should be a faction editor, so you'll be able to create your own factions.
Steve Graber	posted 11-24-98 10:12 AM ET The view of creation origins holds that there is a supreme being who created the universe as we know it. Those who hold this view have differing time frames in which the creation has taken place, from 7 days to several millenia and more. The view of evolutionary origins holds that there is no supreme being who created the universe and the universe as we know it has come about through random changes in the genetic pattern over millions+ of years. In this view of origins the 'universe' itself is the supreme being which caused all things to come into existance (the universe in this sense represents all of the known and unknown laws by which things are governed, such as the law of gravity, which is simply our interpretation of a real power that exists and controls the matter which exists in the universe). From this description, I would put forward that the views of origins (creation and evolution) are identical except in 2 points: 1) The length of time which elapsed from the time of 'the beginning' and today. (What about before the beginning?) 2) What is the nature of the force which has brought about the universe as we know it today. Is the force a personal supreme being who has purposes behind the development of the universe? (What is the origin of this supreme being? What is the purpose behind the creation?) Is the force simply a set of physical and non physical laws which have no apparent long term purpose? (What is the origin of these laws? Are these laws changing as time passes?)