Jump to content

Welcome to The OFFICIAL Pure Pwnage forums
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Religion


  • Please log in to reply
2248 replies to this topic

#1761
Extracheez

Extracheez
  • Members
  • 1,042 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia
  • Xbox / GFWL:xExtracheeZx
QUOTE (Master C @ Sep 7 2009, 11:26 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Thats a...Weird reason to question your believes over and is easily answered by the free will argument. I assume you had similiar problems reconciling your believes with the existence of 'evil'?


How is it easily answered by the free will argument? Why do we hate gays women and blacks? Because we have free will? Ya that makes perfect sense.

QUOTE (Hellswarm @ Sep 7 2009, 05:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Oh, sure, the religious have fashioned themselves statues and temples that may have cost hundreds of thousands of their commissioners' life earnings, but which religions demand equal donation from their followers?

Commissioning a Church brings you no closer to Salvation and commissioning a Statue brings you no closer to Nirvana. Perhaps some ancient form of Roman Catholicism offered forgiveness for one's donation.

What of the Protestant denominations, who were formed almost exclusively to combat the Roman Catholic notion that monetary donations and worldly creations were of importance to their God?

What of non-mainstream religions, such as Taoism?


Because religions don't advertise eternal happiness for 9.95 doesn't change what I said. You can argue against that but the catholic church is the biggest business in the world, face the facts kid, THE HAVE THE BEST BUSINESS MODEL FOR GETTING MONEY. And what about taoism? Stop asking me vague questions, make a point.

QUOTE (Hellswarm @ Sep 7 2009, 05:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
The Theory of Evolution refutes that there is a process/method to how mutations occur - they're random. The process of natural selection, however, is not.


If anything, I would say natural selection is more random than the process of mutation. See; Chaos theory.

EDIT: I thought I would expand on this a little. Atomically we are made of some various organic compounds (carbon, oxygen, nitrogen ect ect) and with enough computational power we could predict exactly how these compounds will react within an organism. However when you put the organism in an environment, things become unpredictable.


QUOTE (Hellswarm @ Sep 7 2009, 05:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
The Theory of Evolution does not, however, suggest that there is no purpose to evolution. If there truly is no god, then at a very basic level the purpose of Natural Selection could be to refine and to promote genetic improvement in each species. A Theist might argue that the purpose of Natural Selection (defined by their respective god) was to eventually create an intelligent race.


Actually, the theory of evolution depends upon the lack of any drive or purpose, the second you say what you just said is the second you have no understanding of the theory of evolution and instead, believe in intelligent design.

QUOTE (Hellswarm @ Sep 7 2009, 05:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
If there was a true purpose, it would be very difficult to prove - science has a knack to be able to prove the how but not the why.

For example, Schwann (Nerve) Cells are observably larger than and in an abnormal shape compared to regular spherical body cells. However, there is no 'proof' that the the reason Schwann Cells are in such an abnormal shape is so that they can be larger. We know that a Cell with a normal shape would not survive if it were the size of a Schwann Cell, but we still can't 'prove' that the shape of the cell changed so that it could be larger. We can easily prove the how, however, and that is of course found in the Theory of Evolution.


-_-

The why is very simple, chaos theory. If you have enough chaos eventually you see ordered patterns. Anyway, my neurology isn't great but isn't the purpose of the schwann cell to insulate the axon by wrapping itself into myelin? It couldn't accomplish this feat unless it had its large flat surface area.

Your understanding of evolution is very "I read a biology text book and can repeat what it said". My advice is to try and gain the understanding of evolution that darwin intended. These days the popular way to do is its to read dawkins.

Edited by Extracheez, 07 September 2009 - 08:21 PM.




#1762
TubularLuggage

TubularLuggage
  • Members
  • 5,221 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sackville, NS
  • Interests:Rock/Metal, Drumming, film making, my woman
My favorite argument is that since some people along the line have chosen to profit from religion, religion must obviously be all BS.

Honestly, at this point in my life, my spiritual status probably doesn't conform to any organized religion. I still believe in God in some form though.

Protip: Just because a corrupt person made their way into a religious establishment, doesn't mean there's nothing to religion.
IPB Image

#1763
Extracheez

Extracheez
  • Members
  • 1,042 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia
  • Xbox / GFWL:xExtracheeZx
QUOTE (TubularLuggage @ Sep 7 2009, 10:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
My favorite argument is that since some people along the line have chosen to profit from religion, religion must obviously be all BS.

Honestly, at this point in my life, my spiritual status probably doesn't conform to any organized religion. I still believe in God in some form though.

Protip: Just because a corrupt person made their way into a religious establishment, doesn't mean there's nothing to religion.


If your referring to me, please note that I never said anything about corrupt individuals abusing the system. That's like me saying Catholicism is bogus because of all the child molesting priests, when really, the Vatican is bogus for literally (by literally I mean they have contracts and documents proving the pope commanded this) commanding that all child molestation cases should be covered up with punishment of excommunication if anyone speaks out.

The system (and thus religion, as religion is the organization of spiritual beliefs) is corrupt in how they treat money, they really waste it. Please note I am not talking about individuals abusing the system. An example would be my local parish has spent thousands on anything from statues to security fences that are all unnecessary, the way the money from donations is spent is quite shocking in my opinion. In fact I've seen the government do MUCH more for the local community than my ex-church ever accomplished.

The very fact that people defend religion is what makes me hate it so much, if people were more receptive to its mistakes and tried to learn from those to make the world better, I would be much more respectful of it. But the simple fact that people think religion is the be all and end all and cry bloody murder whenever someone speaks out against it, shows me that people are just afraid they are wrong. Here's a news flash: Your religion gets stuff wrong, your religion has a lot of corruptness in it, your religion will never make the world perfect, I'm not saying there is no good to it, I'm just pointing out that there is bad to it.

I think the big bang theory is probably wrong, of all the evidence I've read it only convinces me about 90% of the way, I admit that to anyone simply because I am not afraid of being wrong, in fact being wrong is more interesting than being right to me, just as long as people present logical arguments. "We will never know how the universe exists" or "the bible says the world was created in 7 days" are not logical arguments they are null hypotheses and get us nowhere.

Edited by Extracheez, 08 September 2009 - 03:07 AM.




#1764
snow

snow
  • GA Private
  • 276 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:regina sask
  • Interests:cars games and well pp
  • PSN:snow306
  • Rofl-Rupees:1
  • Gamer Army ID:4665
  • Company:Alpha
Ever since there has been one true god there has been killing in his name doesnt mater if that god is alah (dont know if thats how its spelled) or god or any facsimile there of. Im not saying that god is a bad thing for all i know he could be real but the second you base a religion around an idea it becomes dangerous people kill for it people die for it. If you read between the lines of the bible youll see a lot of good ideas and thats all i would regard them as.


However religion also creates good from itself a community. The church my father goes to is small and rather unconventional but it is community where people help one another. So i guess in conclusion its 2 sides of the same coin if there were no religion we would have no religious wars but we would also be loosing the community's based in those religions.
this needs to be on the forum rules page

QUOTE (Extracheez @ Sep 10 2009, 07:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
This again, is where you are taking my argument and calling it false, yet you have completely missed what I'm saying, so much so that I have said "1+1=2" and your reply is "no, because I'm an owl".

#1765
Extracheez

Extracheez
  • Members
  • 1,042 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia
  • Xbox / GFWL:xExtracheeZx
QUOTE (snow @ Sep 8 2009, 04:55 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Ever since there has been one true god there has been killing in his name doesnt mater if that god is alah (dont know if thats how its spelled) or god or any facsimile there of. Im not saying that god is a bad thing for all i know he could be real but the second you base a religion around an idea it becomes dangerous people kill for it people die for it. If you read between the lines of the bible youll see a lot of good ideas and thats all i would regard them as.


However religion also creates good from itself a community. The church my father goes to is small and rather unconventional but it is community where people help one another. So i guess in conclusion its 2 sides of the same coin if there were no religion we would have no religious wars but we would also be loosing the community's based in those religions.


The myth is that we need these religions to have these good ideas and to have these communities. I have recently fallen in with a group of new friends who are all atheist or agnostic and these are the most moral people I have ever met, they also are really active in the community. This is different from the christian/catholics that I know, who often do things most would consider immoral (example would be stealing something from work) and focus more on work and their partners then doing anything in the community.

Religion does not create morals, it only creates dogma. Sure there are some good ideas in the bible, but there are equally damaging ones. Sure there are good ideas in the bible, but that doesn't mean that the people who believe in god follow these ideas.

Edited by Extracheez, 08 September 2009 - 04:49 AM.




#1766
Myth

Myth
  • Members
  • 4,051 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brisbane, Australia
  • Interests:1234567890qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnm
heres an old favourite stuff from atheists which i still fail to get an answer from the christians:

So god is this all knowing, all loving/forgiving/omnipotent/omnipresent and all that being. He is the definition of perfection. why the hell did he one day say, "oh i feel like making shit for no reason just because i can". wasnt he content when the perfect condition that he was in? or was he bored? but surely boredom is a sign of imperfection? or was he for some reason programmed to create by something else? there is no logical reason why this god created everything when everthing was perfect to begin with.

So he goes on and creates the universe, earth and all that. then he decides to create man kind. as the comedic genius that is Ricky Gervais once said, "... then he made man out of clay. He could've just said 'let there be man'- I'm sure a man would've still appeared, but he just felt like making out of clay for some reason". biblical hilarity aside, whats facinating about this god creature is that he, according to christians, loves to test us humans in our faith and love towards it. its like a mother asking her child whether it loves her or not then proceeding to chuck the said child into a pit of fire if the response doesnt satisfy her.

can anyone explain the garden of eden to me please? it has so much plot holes its not funny. why did god create the tree of knowledge and tell adam and eve not to eat from it knowing fully well that if they do, they'll gain the knowledge of good and evil? to test us? what for? if you're the almighty god, you dont need our insignificant opinions. is he THAT selfconscious? why didnt god mention the tree of life and then scurry off to protect it with 'flaming swords' after adam and eve ate from the tree of knowledge? it makes it look like as if god is scared that we'll possess both the knowledge of good and evil as well as eternal life. as if we'll become an equal to this 'god' and he had to stop it. it begs the question though, is god perfect? wasnt he also sick of the 'corruption' of the earth (which by the way, was his creation) that he pretty much said 'fuck it' and decided to flood the hell out of earth? is this not the biblical equivalent of reformating a computer because you (due to your imperfection) put too much shit in your computer?
btw, i find it hilarious that god is THE creator of the first weapon of mass destruction. a sword... thats on fucking fire. you can tell me off all you want seriously, but there is nothing metaphorical about the flaming sword protecting the tree bit.

jesus' teaching is also confusing to me. one example is the famous, "Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone". Its about a girl who was caught in an act of adultery (note: she was getting raped. wheres the man who was raping her?). A man comes to jesus dragging her behind him and tells jesus to stone her because it was the law of god to do so (in jewish law, of which jesus had to abide to obviously. the man was testing jesus' faithfulness to god's law). obviously jesus is caught in a dilemma- if he doesnt stone the girl, he is disobeying the god's law. if he does, it goes against his teachings of peace. but in a fit of brilliance he says the famous line, "Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone" because, according to christians, jesus knew the men were hippocrites. Noone could stone her because everyone sins (technically, you're a sinner anyways even before you're born because of the original sin) and everyone was impressed because its one of those things which sounds deep and shit at first, until you realise that this means i can get away with what ever the hell i do. If i go steal a car and get caught, i can say, 'you cant persecute me because you're a sinner too'. Ive heard chritians tell me im so blinded to take it so literally, and that the 'real' message is more like 'judge not, lest you be judged' kinda thing but honestly, its a written text written by the hands of a human. everyone has their own interpretations- nothing in the bible says 'take this literally but that that as a metaphore'. its a freakin mess.

Edited by Myth, 08 September 2009 - 05:26 AM.


#1767
Master C

Master C
  • Members
  • 5,511 posts
  • xfire:masterca
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, England
  • Xbox / GFWL:Renegade Con
  • Wii:4710238335790963
  • Rofl-Rupees:7
QUOTE (Extracheez @ Sep 8 2009, 02:10 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
How is it easily answered by the free will argument? Why do we hate gays women and blacks? Because we have free will? Ya that makes perfect sense.


Sure, if we choose to act on it.

If you mean the natural antagonism a human feels towards those who are different to us, well its a natural evil you can choose to overcome, much like earthquakes, Tsunamis and disease. You've chosen a very specific element of evil to cast aside your believes, which is a little odd.

If you mean the less natural prejudices developed by society, well these are the evil acts and thoughts from humanity around you. Again you can choose to overcome and change this.

QUOTE (Hellswarm @ Sep 7 2009, 11:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
The Theory of Evolution refutes that there is a process/method to how mutations occur - they're random. The process of natural selection, however, is not.

The Theory of Evolution does not, however, suggest that there is no purpose to evolution. If there truly is no god, then at a very basic level the purpose of Natural Selection could be to refine and to promote genetic improvement in each species. A Theist might argue that the purpose of Natural Selection (defined by their respective god) was to eventually create an intelligent race.


Mhm perhaps, perhaps.

Edited by Master C, 08 September 2009 - 05:58 AM.


#1768
Extracheez

Extracheez
  • Members
  • 1,042 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia
  • Xbox / GFWL:xExtracheeZx
QUOTE (Master C @ Sep 8 2009, 05:47 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Sure, if we choose to act on it.

If you mean the natural antagonism a human feels towards those who are different to us, well its a natural evil you can choose to overcome, much like earthquakes, Tsunamis and disease. You've chosen a very specific element of evil to cast aside your believes, which is a little odd.

If you mean the less natural prejudices developed by society, well these are the evil acts and thoughts from humanity around you. Again you can choose to overcome and change this.


Lol sorry mate but that doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Maybe you can liken homophobia to earthquakes and have that seem like a logical connection, but it pales in comparison to a simple evolutionary psych explanation.

QUOTE (Master C @ Sep 8 2009, 05:47 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Mhm perhaps, perhaps.


No, not perhaps, please don't buy into that understanding of evolution, go read a book on chaos theory or better yet, some charles darwin/richard dawkins



#1769
j type

j type
  • Members
  • 2,690 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Ox
  • Steam ID:jtype
  • Rofl-Rupees:2
QUOTE (Extracheez @ Sep 8 2009, 01:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Lol sorry mate but that doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Maybe you can liken homophobia to earthquakes and have that seem like a logical connection, but it pales in comparison to a simple evolutionary psych explanation.


I think he was likening human prejudice to earthquakes and tsunamis, in that it is a "natural" evil and can be overcome.

I could be wrong though, I just jumped into this thread and saw that. icon_smile.gif

#1770
Master C

Master C
  • Members
  • 5,511 posts
  • xfire:masterca
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, England
  • Xbox / GFWL:Renegade Con
  • Wii:4710238335790963
  • Rofl-Rupees:7
QUOTE (Extracheez @ Sep 8 2009, 01:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Lol sorry mate but that doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Maybe you can liken homophobia to earthquakes and have that seem like a logical connection, but it pales in comparison to a simple evolutionary psych explanation.


I dont think you understood what I said:


QUOTE (j type @ Sep 8 2009, 01:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I think he was likening human prejudice to earthquakes and tsunamis, in that it is a "natural" evil and can be overcome.

I could be wrong though, I just jumped into this thread and saw that. icon_smile.gif


This is what I meant.

QUOTE
No, not perhaps, please don't buy into that understanding of evolution, go read a book on chaos theory or better yet, some charles darwin/richard dawkins


Yes I understand the deterministic side behind the "random" gene mutations but lets just not go there (I dont think it contributes much to this debate).

Edited by Master C, 08 September 2009 - 08:42 AM.


#1771
Extracheez

Extracheez
  • Members
  • 1,042 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia
  • Xbox / GFWL:xExtracheeZx
QUOTE (Master C @ Sep 8 2009, 09:35 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I dont think you understood what I said:




This is what I meant.


What did you mean? My question was why do humans hate homosexuals, oppress women and those of other races and your answer was because we have the free will to and we should learn to over come this natural evil like disease...

I... I'm not a good enough debater to know where to start dissecting what you put forward, you don't actually answer my question. Why do we hate? Because we have the free will to hate? Huh? How is that an acceptable answer to the question, it explains nothing. What exactly is a natural evil, please denote a "natural evil" so that I may respond to this properly.

EDIT: Just to simplify what I'm saying, I've asked "why does 1+1=2" and your reply sounds to me "because of potato".

Edited by Extracheez, 08 September 2009 - 09:38 AM.




#1772
Master C

Master C
  • Members
  • 5,511 posts
  • xfire:masterca
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, England
  • Xbox / GFWL:Renegade Con
  • Wii:4710238335790963
  • Rofl-Rupees:7
I wasn't really answering your question, rather I was puzzled by it.

I ask this again: Did you have trouble reconciling your beliefs with the existence of evil? Because what you are describing there is just evil inherent in human nature. Acting on it is a choice and therefore part of a humans free will. However, as I think you are asking, there is no easy answer as to why a god would make it part of human nature. Or why there is any natural evil. Explanations vary from 'this life is a test for the afterlife' to 'You deserve this for being a sinner' and 'there is no way we could understand gods will, so just accept it'. And of course theres more theories.

Oh and natural evil is an evil out of a humans control. I guess.

Edited by Master C, 08 September 2009 - 09:55 AM.


#1773
fykusfire

fykusfire
  • GA Private
  • 1,316 posts
  • xfire:fykusfire
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Houston, TX
  • Steam ID:fykusfire
  • Gamer Army ID:1293
  • Company:Hotel
QUOTE (Myth @ Sep 4 2009, 11:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Big bang is theorised to have happened almost 15 billion years ago. creationism dates the events of the genesis as mere thousands of years ago.
No, only certain sects of fundamentalists date it back that far. There are just as many groups that believe that science's depiction is the correct one. Please, do not generalize.
QUOTE (Extracheez @ Sep 6 2009, 11:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
What turned me from the bible to evolution was simply wondering why there was such thing as prejudice against homosexuals, women and people of different nationalities. Nothing in religion offered a satisfactory explanation. However biologically speaking, there are satisfying explanations for why in our society there is sexism, homophobia and racism. This question from my early childhood essentially made me realize that religion does not have any truly logical answers to any questions and if one cant take "god did it" as an acceptable answer, then one must find the answers for himself.

Its not easy to answer why I left my faith behind because there was so much too it, I had strong faith and it took me many years until it finally occurred to me that I no longer had faith, but the simple answer is because I'm a naturally curious person and the more I learned about anything and everything, the more it became apparent to me that there is no point believing in anything spiritual.

Spirituality generally revolves around giving people the answers they want for a fee. If I wanted that, I would pay for a shrink, not a priest.
Again, no generalizations please. Not all groups in Christianity at least treat gays, women, and others races with disrespect. I know the ones that do, don't get me wrong, but Christianity certainly can not be condensed down to one specific thought process or set of ideals. The different schools of though, sects, and denominations all believe wildly varying things.
QUOTE (myself quoting wiki)
Liberal Christian Universalism (specifically what I personally am a part of)

A variety of people who have liberal interpretations of Christianity hold Universalist beliefs and can be considered Liberal Christian Universalists. This category of Christian Universalism includes some members of mainline Protestant denominations, some people influenced by the New Age and New Thought movements, some people in the emerging church movement, some Unitarian Universalists who continue to follow Jesus as their primary spiritual teacher, and some Christians from other religious backgrounds who may or may not attend church.

Liberal Christian Universalism emphasizes the all-inclusive love of God and tends to be more open to finding truth and value in non-Christian spiritual traditions compared to the attitude of other forms of Christian Universalism, while remaining generally Christ-centered. In contrast to Evangelical Universalism, Liberal Christian Universalism views the Bible as an imperfect human document containing divine revelations, is not necessarily Trinitarian, and often downplays or rejects blood atonement theology in its view of the crucifixion of Jesus. Some Liberal Christian Universalists believe in mystical, Gnostic, or New Age ideas such as Panentheism and the preexistence and reincarnation of the soul, and New Thought ideas such as the law of attraction. Liberal Christian Universalists sometimes do not view homosexuality as sinful and may advocate equal rights for gay people in the church and in society.
The Unitarian Universalist Christian Fellowship is an organization for Liberal Christian Universalists, especially those who belong to the Unitarian Universalist Association. The Liberal Catholic Church and the Unity Church are liberal Christian denominations which teach some Universalist beliefs.

Edited by fykusfire, 08 September 2009 - 12:57 PM.


#1774
TheBase

TheBase
  • Members
  • 1,342 posts
  • xfire:thewutangclan
  • Gender:Male
QUOTE (Myth @ Sep 8 2009, 06:18 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
heres an old favourite stuff from atheists which i still fail to get an answer from the christians:

So god is this all knowing, all loving/forgiving/omnipotent/omnipresent and all that being. He is the definition of perfection. why the hell did he one day say, "oh i feel like making shit for no reason just because i can". wasnt he content when the perfect condition that he was in? or was he bored? but surely boredom is a sign of imperfection? or was he for some reason programmed to create by something else? there is no logical reason why this god created everything when everthing was perfect to begin with.

So he goes on and creates the universe, earth and all that. then he decides to create man kind. as the comedic genius that is Ricky Gervais once said, "... then he made man out of clay. He could've just said 'let there be man'- I'm sure a man would've still appeared, but he just felt like making out of clay for some reason". biblical hilarity aside, whats facinating about this god creature is that he, according to christians, loves to test us humans in our faith and love towards it. its like a mother asking her child whether it loves her or not then proceeding to chuck the said child into a pit of fire if the response doesnt satisfy her.

can anyone explain the garden of eden to me please? it has so much plot holes its not funny. why did god create the tree of knowledge and tell adam and eve not to eat from it knowing fully well that if they do, they'll gain the knowledge of good and evil? to test us? what for? if you're the almighty god, you dont need our insignificant opinions. is he THAT selfconscious? why didnt god mention the tree of life and then scurry off to protect it with 'flaming swords' after adam and eve ate from the tree of knowledge? it makes it look like as if god is scared that we'll possess both the knowledge of good and evil as well as eternal life. as if we'll become an equal to this 'god' and he had to stop it. it begs the question though, is god perfect? wasnt he also sick of the 'corruption' of the earth (which by the way, was his creation) that he pretty much said 'fuck it' and decided to flood the hell out of earth? is this not the biblical equivalent of reformating a computer because you (due to your imperfection) put too much shit in your computer?
btw, i find it hilarious that god is THE creator of the first weapon of mass destruction. a sword... thats on fucking fire. you can tell me off all you want seriously, but there is nothing metaphorical about the flaming sword protecting the tree bit.

jesus' teaching is also confusing to me. one example is the famous, "Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone". Its about a girl who was caught in an act of adultery (note: she was getting raped. wheres the man who was raping her?). A man comes to jesus dragging her behind him and tells jesus to stone her because it was the law of god to do so (in jewish law, of which jesus had to abide to obviously. the man was testing jesus' faithfulness to god's law). obviously jesus is caught in a dilemma- if he doesnt stone the girl, he is disobeying the god's law. if he does, it goes against his teachings of peace. but in a fit of brilliance he says the famous line, "Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone" because, according to christians, jesus knew the men were hippocrites. Noone could stone her because everyone sins (technically, you're a sinner anyways even before you're born because of the original sin) and everyone was impressed because its one of those things which sounds deep and shit at first, until you realise that this means i can get away with what ever the hell i do. If i go steal a car and get caught, i can say, 'you cant persecute me because you're a sinner too'. Ive heard chritians tell me im so blinded to take it so literally, and that the 'real' message is more like 'judge not, lest you be judged' kinda thing but honestly, its a written text written by the hands of a human. everyone has their own interpretations- nothing in the bible says 'take this literally but that that as a metaphore'. its a freakin mess.

Myth, you are probably the most logical thinker in this entire fucking thread. The stupidity of some of these posts are just... mind blowing.

#1775
fykusfire

fykusfire
  • GA Private
  • 1,316 posts
  • xfire:fykusfire
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Houston, TX
  • Steam ID:fykusfire
  • Gamer Army ID:1293
  • Company:Hotel
QUOTE (Extracheez @ Sep 7 2009, 08:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
How is it easily answered by the free will argument? Why do we hate gays women and blacks? Because we have free will? Ya that makes perfect sense.



Because religions don't advertise eternal happiness for 9.95 doesn't change what I said. You can argue against that but the catholic church is the biggest business in the world, face the facts kid, THE HAVE THE BEST BUSINESS MODEL FOR GETTING MONEY. And what about taoism? Stop asking me vague questions, make a point.



If anything, I would say natural selection is more random than the process of mutation. See; Chaos theory.

EDIT: I thought I would expand on this a little. Atomically we are made of some various organic compounds (carbon, oxygen, nitrogen ect ect) and with enough computational power we could predict exactly how these compounds will react within an organism. However when you put the organism in an environment, things become unpredictable.




Actually, the theory of evolution depends upon the lack of any drive or purpose, the second you say what you just said is the second you have no understanding of the theory of evolution and instead, believe in intelligent design.



-_-

The why is very simple, chaos theory. If you have enough chaos eventually you see ordered patterns. Anyway, my neurology isn't great but isn't the purpose of the schwann cell to insulate the axon by wrapping itself into myelin? It couldn't accomplish this feat unless it had its large flat surface area.

Your understanding of evolution is very "I read a biology text book and can repeat what it said". My advice is to try and gain the understanding of evolution that darwin intended. These days the popular way to do is its to read dawkins.
Certainly if you believe everything was or is currently in a state of chaos, then this line of thinking makes sense. What about the universe itself though? It wasn't just a large collection of chaos that a natural orbiting pattern of all celestial bodies was observed. This process is a stable pattern that can be found at any level of the universe. Even when let's say two celestial bodies collide and create an non-orbital trajectory of debris, it is only a temporary one. Eventually that debris will fall into a stable orbital pattern as well. This is of course due to magnetism. For that matter, how is it that a blackhole, whose sole existence is to pull matter within and destroy it keeps a galaxy such as ours anchored to allow stable orbits of other planets? What does chaos theory say about that?

I'm sure there is a good explanation to these questions of course. As far as chaos theory being that explanation? I'm not so keen on making that declaration. It would seem to me that if everything in creation was in a state of chaos at all times, that no order could be observed. We all know the universe is in a constant state of expansion. No arguing that. But if there was nothing to off-set that, a galaxy would not be able to sustain itself for long. The truth is, it is because a super massive blackhole is both anchoring and pulling us back towards itself that the universe's expansion is kept in check to enough of a degree that we can sit here and debate about these things. The fact that there is a similar situation going on in every galaxy is in my mind at least some sort of refutation to a fully chaotic state of being, and is instead a nod to intelligence being in some capacity the cause for things being as they are.
QUOTE (Myth @ Sep 8 2009, 05:18 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
heres an old favourite stuff from atheists which i still fail to get an answer from the christians:

So god is this all knowing, all loving/forgiving/omnipotent/omnipresent and all that being. He is the definition of perfection. why the hell did he one day say, "oh i feel like making shit for no reason just because i can". wasnt he content when the perfect condition that he was in? or was he bored? but surely boredom is a sign of imperfection? or was he for some reason programmed to create by something else? there is no logical reason why this god created everything when everthing was perfect to begin with.

So he goes on and creates the universe, earth and all that. then he decides to create man kind. as the comedic genius that is Ricky Gervais once said, "... then he made man out of clay. He could've just said 'let there be man'- I'm sure a man would've still appeared, but he just felt like making out of clay for some reason". biblical hilarity aside, whats facinating about this god creature is that he, according to christians, loves to test us humans in our faith and love towards it. its like a mother asking her child whether it loves her or not then proceeding to chuck the said child into a pit of fire if the response doesnt satisfy her.
This is yet again a generalization of Christianity. Not all sects believe in "hell." Some believe in universal reconciliation, and some others believe in annihilationism. "Hell" is simply not scripturally sound though. Any Christian that explores deeply into the their faith and the Bible in general would recognize this lie. Also, you are using empirical human logic to determine the reasoning behind why a being outside of human logic did anything. If you can't understand why that is a bad idea, so be it.
QUOTE (Myth)
can anyone explain the garden of eden to me please? it has so much plot holes its not funny. why did god create the tree of knowledge and tell adam and eve not to eat from it knowing fully well that if they do, they'll gain the knowledge of good and evil? to test us? what for? if you're the almighty god, you dont need our insignificant opinions. is he THAT selfconscious? why didnt god mention the tree of life and then scurry off to protect it with 'flaming swords' after adam and eve ate from the tree of knowledge? it makes it look like as if god is scared that we'll possess both the knowledge of good and evil as well as eternal life. as if we'll become an equal to this 'god' and he had to stop it. it begs the question though, is god perfect? wasnt he also sick of the 'corruption' of the earth (which by the way, was his creation) that he pretty much said 'fuck it' and decided to flood the hell out of earth? is this not the biblical equivalent of reformating a computer because you (due to your imperfection) put too much shit in your computer?
btw, i find it hilarious that god is THE creator of the first weapon of mass destruction. a sword... thats on fucking fire. you can tell me off all you want seriously, but there is nothing metaphorical about the flaming sword protecting the tree bit.
You are taking this literally? Only maybe two schools of Christian thought do that. Every single other one teaches it is a parable. Even if we were not to take this completely metaphorically, what may have been the explanation comes from a very different line of thinking than mainstream Christianity/Judaism. Suppose a race of hyper-intelligent beings, possibly alien, named the Annunaki (some of which being the same fallen angels in the Bible) came to earth to create a race of intelligent workers from a pre-existing group who were still animalic niche organisms (similar to the state that Adam and Eve were in the beginning of Genesis). To keep us from being enslaved by these beings, God commanded that we stay away from them.

This would come with a trade-off. If we were to mingle with them, we would gain intelligence. If we did not, we would remain in a much more primative state. "Adam and Eve" not knowing the true rammifications of their actions because well, they were dumb animals, made the choice to be intelligent instead by allowing the beings to inject them with a type of bacteria, altering our genetic code entirely. I couldn't ever with any certainty tell you if this was correct. It was however but one explanation I have heard to your question. I certainly do not close my brain off to alternate explanations of anything, because you just never know. I know I at least wasn't there then, so I have no idea if any of that was true or not.

As far as the flood, I have heard it was more or less a way to purge the earth from the sons of humans and the Annunaki/Fallen Angels, the giant Nephilim. The reason why other humans were destroyed was because that part of the world had become wicked idol worshipers, and did not heed the word of Noah. I don't believe it was the intention of God to destroy humanity based on what I read.
QUOTE (Myth)
jesus' teaching is also confusing to me. one example is the famous, "Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone". Its about a girl who was caught in an act of adultery (note: she was getting raped. wheres the man who was raping her?). A man comes to jesus dragging her behind him and tells jesus to stone her because it was the law of god to do so (in jewish law, of which jesus had to abide to obviously. the man was testing jesus' faithfulness to god's law). obviously jesus is caught in a dilemma- if he doesnt stone the girl, he is disobeying the god's law. if he does, it goes against his teachings of peace. but in a fit of brilliance he says the famous line, "Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone" because, according to christians, jesus knew the men were hippocrites. Noone could stone her because everyone sins (technically, you're a sinner anyways even before you're born because of the original sin) and everyone was impressed because its one of those things which sounds deep and shit at first, until you realise that this means i can get away with what ever the hell i do. If i go steal a car and get caught, i can say, 'you cant persecute me because you're a sinner too'. Ive heard chritians tell me im so blinded to take it so literally, and that the 'real' message is more like 'judge not, lest you be judged' kinda thing but honestly, its a written text written by the hands of a human. everyone has their own interpretations- nothing in the bible says 'take this literally but that that as a metaphore'. its a freakin mess.
Well, a Christian's answer should have been that Yeshua needed not to follow any of "god's laws" as you put it because he was God. He would make the choice as to whether that would be lawful or not, not those trying to trumpet "god's laws" in Israel.

Edited by fykusfire, 08 September 2009 - 02:14 PM.


#1776
snow

snow
  • GA Private
  • 276 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:regina sask
  • Interests:cars games and well pp
  • PSN:snow306
  • Rofl-Rupees:1
  • Gamer Army ID:4665
  • Company:Alpha
QUOTE (Extracheez @ Sep 8 2009, 03:41 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
The myth is that we need these religions to have these good ideas and to have these communities. I have recently fallen in with a group of new friends who are all atheist or agnostic and these are the most moral people I have ever met, they also are really active in the community. This is different from the christian/catholics that I know, who often do things most would consider immoral (example would be stealing something from work) and focus more on work and their partners then doing anything in the community.

Religion does not create morals, it only creates dogma. Sure there are some good ideas in the bible, but there are equally damaging ones. Sure there are good ideas in the bible, but that doesn't mean that the people who believe in god follow these ideas.


im not saying we would loose all form of community im saying we would loose the community created by these churches. Also the ideas are what the religion is created around but as soon as you create a religion people will die for it. An idea is far less dangerous. hope that clears up what i said.
this needs to be on the forum rules page

QUOTE (Extracheez @ Sep 10 2009, 07:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
This again, is where you are taking my argument and calling it false, yet you have completely missed what I'm saying, so much so that I have said "1+1=2" and your reply is "no, because I'm an owl".

#1777
Myth

Myth
  • Members
  • 4,051 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brisbane, Australia
  • Interests:1234567890qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnm
QUOTE (fykusfire @ Sep 9 2009, 03:47 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
No, only certain sects of fundamentalists date it back that far. There are just as many groups that believe that science's depiction is the correct one. Please, do not generalize.Again, no generalizations please. Not all groups in Christianity at least treat gays, women, and others races with disrespect. I know the ones that do, don't get me wrong, but Christianity certainly can not be condensed down to one specific thought process or set of ideals. The different schools of though, sects, and denominations all believe wildly varying things.


If "certain" sects of fundamentalists date the beginning of our universe as being billions of years ago then they're not following the bible or they've fucked their biblical chronology so bad that they cannot be classifed as christians. the bible is quite specific about its 'timeline' despite it not acutally listing dates. the book of exodus actually lists the decendants of adam and lists how old they were when they died. and we can use these data to estimate the centuries they refer to- for eg, Abraham goes to egypt. from there, using the bible and googling the egyptian civilisation i can easily estimate how long ago the genisis started. thats off the top of my head. its not hard. im sure chritian 'historians' obviously look into it further and have more 'accurate' ways to estimate the dates.

QUOTE (fykusfire @ Sep 9 2009, 04:35 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
This is yet again a generalization of Christianity. Not all sects believe in "hell." Some believe in universal reconciliation, and some others believe in annihilationism. "Hell" is simply not scripturally sound though. Any Christian that explores deeply into the their faith and the Bible in general would recognize this lie. Also, you are using empirical human logic to determine the reasoning behind why a being outside of human logic did anything. If you can't understand why that is a bad idea, so be it.You are taking this literally? Only maybe two schools of Christian thought do that. Every single other one teaches it is a parable. Even if we were not to take this completely metaphorically, what may have been the explanation comes from a very different line of thinking than mainstream Christianity/Judaism.


you realise chritianity in itself is a BLANKET TERM. its USED to generalise/describe all religion which believes in the christ.
i can name 3 christian school of thoughts which take the bible literally and preach about hell. Catholicism, protestants and orthodox. Catholicism takes up HALF of the 2 billion christian population, while protestants and orthodox together take up a quarter. that leaves a quarter of the christian population for your smaller, lesser known churches (and there are hundreds of the smaller sects, not including non-denonminational christians) trust me, the majority of christian churches believe in hell.
and yes, im using human logic to determine the reasoning behind god's actions because quite frankly, in the bible, god is as imperfect as us human beings, as exampled very briefly below.

QUOTE (fykusfire @ Sep 9 2009, 04:35 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Suppose a race of hyper-intelligent beings, possibly alien, named the Annunaki (some of which being the same fallen angels in the Bible) came to earth to create a race of intelligent workers from a pre-existing group who were still animalic niche organisms (similar to the state that Adam and Eve were in the beginning of Genesis). To keep us from being enslaved by these beings, God commanded that we stay away from them.
This would come with a trade-off. If we were to mingle with them, we would gain intelligence. If we did not, we would remain in a much more primative state. "Adam and Eve" not knowing the true rammifications of their actions because well, they were dumb animals, made the choice to be intelligent instead by allowing the beings to inject them with a type of bacteria, altering our genetic code entirely. I couldn't ever with any certainty tell you if this was correct. It was however but one explanation I have heard to your question. I certainly do not close my brain off to alternate explanations of anything, because you just never know. I know I at least wasn't there then, so I have no idea if any of that was true or not.

As far as the flood, I have heard it was more or less a way to purge the earth from the sons of humans and the Annunaki/Fallen Angels, the giant Nephilim. The reason why other humans were destroyed was because that part of the world had become wicked idol worshipers, and did not heed the word of Noah. I don't believe it was the intention of God to destroy humanity based on what I read.


i've... never read something so ridiculous... but what ever, if you believe that, ive nothing against it. but what astonishes me is that people would beleive those things on the bases of... nothing. I could've come up with somehting even more 'believable' than that if i sat down and did some study more into the bible and put my uni biochem/genetics shit here and there to make it 'scientific'.

My argument concerning the flood was not that god was unjust in killing thousands (as is the normal stance atheists take) but that in doing so he showed signs of the human trait commonly referred to as the, "aw fuck it, wheres the reset button". My argument is that god doesnt seem so 'perfect' as christians make out as.

QUOTE (fykusfire @ Sep 9 2009, 04:35 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Well, a Christian's answer should have been that Yeshua needed not to follow any of "god's laws" as you put it because he was God. He would make the choice as to whether that would be lawful or not, not those trying to trumpet "god's laws" in Israel.


my point was that his 'solution' was a shit solution, not that he didnt follow the jewish law of stoning the girl. the famous line, "let he who has not sinned throw the first stone" is a shit way to carry out authority/law because, as i said, i can get away with any crime by saying, "you cant prosecute me because you're a sinner too". now that i think of it, im sure jesus hasnt sinned, so why the hell didnt HE throw the first stone?

Edited by Myth, 09 September 2009 - 03:12 AM.


#1778
Extracheez

Extracheez
  • Members
  • 1,042 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia
  • Xbox / GFWL:xExtracheeZx
QUOTE (Master C @ Sep 8 2009, 10:50 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I wasn't really answering your question, rather I was puzzled by it.


My bad.

QUOTE (Master C @ Sep 8 2009, 10:50 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I ask this again: Did you have trouble reconciling your beliefs with the existence of evil? Because what you are describing there is just evil inherent in human nature. Acting on it is a choice and therefore part of a humans free will. However, as I think you are asking, there is no easy answer as to why a god would make it part of human nature. Or why there is any natural evil. Explanations vary from 'this life is a test for the afterlife' to 'You deserve this for being a sinner' and 'there is no way we could understand gods will, so just accept it'. And of course theres more theories.

Oh and natural evil is an evil out of a humans control. I guess.


"evil"(as you put it) was only the thing that got me asking questions of such a nature that led me to answer them with biology, it is in no way a huge part of why I gave up my religion. Unlike you I just cant "accept it", I ask questions and I'm too curious to not get the answers myself. I'm not saying that is a negative thing, I'm just pointing out that I am different from you(by the by I'm assuming your religious). Let me give you an example of how my mind approaches what you just said:

QUOTE
Did you have trouble reconciling your beliefs with the existence of evil?


Define evil, what is evil, how did evil come about, why is there evil, is evil set or relative.

QUOTE
Because what you are describing there is just evil inherent in human nature


See above(what is evil), why am I describing evil? Why are humans inherently evil? What is human nature? Where did human nature come from? Why does human nature change?

QUOTE
Acting on it is a choice and therefore part of a humans free will.


See above above(what is evil), why would someone act on the choice to be evil? What is free will? How do we know we have free will? Why would someone be compelled to act in any way? What is behavior, what is motivation, what is emotion, what are morals ect more free will questions ect.

So yeah, that's just all the questions I would ask about what you are saying, of course to get through all that would take months and I doubt any of us really give a shit, I know I don't want to discuss it with you, because I already have my own definitions of everything you said and they in no way make sense in the way that you said it all. I can never understand the will of god, but I can understand evolution.

QUOTE (fykusfire @ Sep 8 2009, 01:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
No, only certain sects of fundamentalists date it back that far. There are just as many groups that believe that science's depiction is the correct one. Please, do not generalize.Again, no generalizations please. Not all groups in Christianity at least treat gays, women, and others races with disrespect. I know the ones that do, don't get me wrong, but Christianity certainly can not be condensed down to one specific thought process or set of ideals. The different schools of though, sects, and denominations all believe wildly varying things.


All groups of Christianity pick and choose what morals they want to abide by in the bible, because some choose to ignore the book their beliefs are based on, just brings me to the next point of why follow any of the beliefs at all, if some are wrong, the book is imperfect and should be cast aside completely.



#1779
Master C

Master C
  • Members
  • 5,511 posts
  • xfire:masterca
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, England
  • Xbox / GFWL:Renegade Con
  • Wii:4710238335790963
  • Rofl-Rupees:7
QUOTE (Extracheez @ Sep 9 2009, 09:09 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
"evil"(as you put it) was only the thing that got me asking questions of such a nature that led me to answer them with biology, it is in no way a huge part of why I gave up my religion. Unlike you I just cant "accept it", I ask questions and I'm too curious to not get the answers myself. I'm not saying that is a negative thing, I'm just pointing out that I am different from you(by the by I'm assuming your religious). Let me give you an example of how my mind approaches what you just said:


Wrong icon_razz.gif. I am an agnostic at best. By the way the 'just accept it' bit is...Well not something I agree with, but something I can very much understand. If there is some ridiculously powerful god living on a completely different plane of existence who's mental processes are well beyond what we could ever hope to comprehend, its goals and reasonings would almost certainly be beyond us.


QUOTE
...loads of questions about evil...


Nooooooooooooo thanks.

As for beliefs and the bible, here is my explanation I use when I'm feeling particularly theistic:

All religions are intrepretations of the same thing: That there exists some higher power, that there exists an afterlife and that there is some ultimate justice in life. Every now and again that higher power sends down a messenger to earth to tell us what to do. Whether that messenger is a nutjob, or a charlatan (at least in their own eyes), they are working towards God will whether they know it or not. The messenge sent down to earth is generally positive thing: Live a good life, be a good person and at the end you might even be rewarded for it.

Now unfortunately, as is the case for the bible, the message eventually falls into the wrong hands. Infact its historical fact that the bible has been translated, rewritten and generally manipulated thousands of times by thousands of people and organisations, each with their own agendas. The Romans did it, a bunch of Kings did it, popes, bishops and even normal individuals did it. So the sensible Christian realises that you literally HAVE to pick and choose your believes from this mess of a book, because no one actually thinks that the entire book is the direct word of god (unlike the Quran, but lets not go there). Ontop of THIS we also have to realise that a lot of the bible consists of metaphors and parables, which should NEVER be intrepreted directly. All this weakens the original message, but it still goes strong because deep down people know whats right or wrong, they just sometimes need a little confirmation and thats what the message does.

So there you go.

Edited by Master C, 09 September 2009 - 09:52 AM.


#1780
Pawnator

Pawnator
  • Members
  • 5,495 posts
  • Gender:Male
QUOTE (Myth @ Sep 9 2009, 01:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
now that i think of it, im sure jesus hasnt sinned, so why the hell didnt HE throw the first stone?

Answer:

"7 and when they continued asking him, having bent himself back, he said unto them, 'The sinless of you -- let him first cast the stone at her;' 8 and again having stooped down, he was writing on the ground, 9 and they having heard, and by the conscience being convicted, were going forth one by one, having begun from the elders -- unto the last; and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. 10 And Jesus having bent himself back, and having seen no one but the woman, said to her, 'Woman, where are those -- thine accusers? did no one pass sentence upon thee?' 11 and she said, 'No one, Sir;' and Jesus said to her, 'Neither do I pass sentence on thee; be going on, and no more sin.'"

Yeshua is the only one fit to judge, but chooses to abstain from judgment.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users