What are your beliefs?
This will not end well, it will turn into flaming, and will tear us all apart, please lock this.
I hope that we are able to share our views in a polite way, without flaming.
Agreed; I, for one, am an atheist, who denies both occult and ethereal influences, but I can respect the views of others.
The Beliefs of Steelfist:
1) There are no divine beings.
2) There is no such thing as demons.
3) The dead are dead, and pretending otherwise is disrespectful to the dead and often unhealthy for the living.
4) People are responsible for their own actions. If somebody does good, it is because they chose to, if somebody does evil, it is because they chose to. Neither any gods nor and devils forced them.
I am happy to defend my views, and change them. It might be best off moved to the politics section.
Quote from: Steelfist on August 23, 2010, 07:30:05 PM
Agreed; I, for one, am an atheist, who denies both occult and ethereal influences, but I can respect the views of others.
The Beliefs of Steelfist:
1) There are no divine beings.
2) There is no such thing as demons.
3) The dead are dead, and pretending otherwise is disrespectful to the dead and often unhealthy for the living.
4) People are responsible for their own actions. If somebody does good, it is because they chose to, if somebody does evil, it is because they chose to. Neither any gods nor and devils forced them.
I am happy to defend my views, and change them. It might be best off moved to the politics section.
I would have to agree with that, seeing as how no religion has any hard evidence of their gods or demons, or of Heaven or Hell. I'm a fairly open-minded person, but until I have some proof of God, Jesus, etc., I will have to say that I don't believe in them.
Meanwhile, the belief that the world acts according to certain rules is fairly conclusively proven.
You can not change the laws of Physics... Religion on the other hand is governed by whatever keeps you in power - I forget who said this but it is true in so many ways.
Agreed, one cannot prove not come up with solid evidence of any deity, however is that not tha basis of religion, would you peleive in, for instance a coffee table, after all one can easily prove it's existance, but nobody would because there is no beleif where as with god one must beleive hence the term faith is often equated with religion.
spell check/grammar check please. Reading that actually forced me to think about what it meant.
Sorry, my iphone has a terrible keyboard and no spell check, the grammer was because I tried to quote but it got all messed up.
Might I add that though I am one of belief I can say the hard evidence escapes me. Also the iPhone key board is good I am using it right now. The new software should give auto correction and at least underline in red.
Edit: As Helen Hayes once said "love is perhaps the only glimpse we are permited of eternity."
I beleive that I need new software.
Well, while religions are about God, Jesus, Heavan, Hell, etc., they are actually mainly formed for one reason: hope. Religion gives someone to turn to for help, even if no-one is there to listen, the believers will think whenever something good happens, that their god caused it, and they're thankful for that.
I have the same beliefs than Steelfist.
I, too, agree with Steelfist. However, what Duskie-poo said is right; religons are often centered around hope, hope that justice will always be served, hope that we will see our loved ones again, and hope that there is something more than the world than we know. Therefore, despite being non-religous, I respect and accept any religons, provided they are not twisted in cases like the terrorist factions of Islam.
(Note: I am not perpetuating the stereotype that Islam is a religon of terror, merely stating that I do not condone the factions in which it is turned into one)
thank you MikeW781, I believe that the terrorist groups are straying too far from the principles which Islam holds dear, to be truly Muslim. Islam is a religion consisting mainly of nonviolent dogmas.
Indeed; I agree with Duskling, although I would add that they are also formed to give people a 'scapegoat'. It is 'God's Will'!
Incidentally, the Quaran prohibits suicide. Something to think about.
I know, if I'm not mistaken, so do the Bible and the Torah.
Kudos on spelling Quaran correctly.
Quote from: The Holy namelesskitty on August 24, 2010, 10:33:57 AM
I believe that the terrorist groups are straying too far from the principles which Islam holds dear, to be truly Muslim. Islam is a religion consisting mainly of nonviolent dogmas.
This is true. Many people believe that Islam is a religon that encourages terrorism, but it is in reality a few evil people who twist the religon to get people to do what they want. Christianity was used for the same purpose throughout European history- wether to keep monarchs in power or convince the people that they should go to war, like in the Crusades.
Religion does seem to make people very easy to manipulate.
I just love manipulating people... especially my friends. :-* They never even notice it...
Agreed, but let's not get off-topic.
Quote from: Steelfist on August 24, 2010, 12:18:06 PM
Agreed, but let's not get off-topic.
Originally, I was going to say that, but then I get carried away...
Damn this forum really needs a cheesy smiley...
I think that the pros and cons of religion are on topic, including that people often are manipulated by religion.
That is on topic, but that isn't precisely what I was talking about.
You know the earliest of religions where almost always polytheistic than the very fist monotheistic religion came in Egypt. Ancient Egyptians worship was a form of syncretistic polytheism, except briefly during the reign of Pharaoh Akhenaten , who became an uncompromising monotheist in the 14th century BCE. The economic distress that occurred at the end of his reign was seen as a warning from the gods and his successor restored the ancient beliefs.
Quote from: Cypher on August 24, 2010, 12:58:03 PM
Damn this forum really needs a cheesy smiley...
:D is labeled Cheesy.
Quote from: PinkPanzer on August 25, 2010, 07:10:01 PM
You know the earliest of religions where almost always polytheistic than the very fist monotheistic religion came in Egypt. Ancient Egyptians worship was a form of syncretistic polytheism, except briefly during the reign of Pharaoh Akhenaten , who became an uncompromising monotheist in the 14th century BCE. The economic distress that occurred at the end of his reign was seen as a warning from the gods and his successor restored the ancient beliefs.
Thats interesting. Our teachers always taught that Juadism was unique for being monotheistic, and I believe I was told that it was the very firsy monotheistic religon. Maybe the source used for that meant widespread monotheistic religons, or ones existing today.
Apart from what I expressed earlier, I also believe there is an infinite number of parallel dimensions.
In answer to the time old question; if God doesn't exist, then what are the chances of the world being perfect for life?
In short; very, very high! Let us take, for example, the theory that the universe is infinite. Let us accept that it is the case, just while I explain.
If the universe is infinite, so are the chances that there will be life. On many planets, in fact. No matter how low the probability, it is still almost certain. Let us take the probability of 1/100. If you times it by infinity (Which is impossible, of course), then it will reach 100, making it almost certain to occur, an infinite number of times. Whatever the probability that a planet will sustain life, it will still be almost certain to occur an infinite number of times.
I probably didn't explain very well, so feel free to ask for clarification on any point.
I sure there is intelligent life out there. There's little probability, but lot's of possibility...
As I stated; it's almost certain.
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3636/3589685944_41baa3deba_o.jpg)
Well, I shall ponder it.
I might answer the question. But the opposite is equally possible . . .
Quote from: Ertxiem on August 26, 2010, 06:28:30 PM
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3636/3589685944_41baa3deba_o.jpg)
Anyone else see how incredibly right that is? Any intelligent life out there knows that we are, while some aren't, a very violent and close-minded race, if we just open our eyes, we could see that. Besides, they know we'll think that they are trying to invade, kill their diplomats, and start a war nobody wanted, but we will, inevitibly, lose. Now, am I right, or does Duskie-Poo watch too many movies? :D
Duskie-Poo watches too many movies. They'll rot your teeth and fingernails 'ya know.
'Poo is right, though, depressing as it is.
Quote from: bugfartboy on August 25, 2010, 09:51:26 PM
I am hardcore baptist. There is a God. There is only one God. Where did space come from? Where did matter come from? Why is the universe constantly expanding? It had to have had a beginning, otherwise, where did it come from? It the earth were any closer to or from the sun, it would burn, or freeze. Random? Not. Chariots at the bottom of the dead sea? Biblical scripture says it. These are the questions.
Don't leave your self so closed minded. Though I am a believer of the same exact religion as you are you still gotta know some facts. The big bang theory the most well known theory to explain our existence. There is hard proof of the theory so don't think its a bunch of b.s. One of the most significant proof is the heat from the bang. The big bang of course generated unfathomable amounts of heat. (Now here comes the fact I'm to lazy to research on, but I do
know this
explanation for a
fact.) Now to my memory I think it was radio waves or antenna arrays that caused its discovery. Radio waves or some other wave in the Electro Magnetic Spectrum found a weird static that can only be derived from a heat signature. How is his possible you ask. Well to bad I forgot that part too. Also I forgot or I didn't remember correctly on the facts I have written on.
Quote from: bugfartboy on August 27, 2010, 11:37:28 PM
Alright, where did the matter come from? Where did the space for it come from?
Do you not get it the extrem heat created the bases of it from protons to quarks. Over millions of development matter was finally created. Billions later our solar system.
Where did the quarks come from? Magic?
I see what you mean; the start of matter, how it all came to be is a mystery. It possibly always will be. However, I prefer to gain information on the world around me from solid facts, rather than faith.
Quote from: MikeW781 on August 28, 2010, 09:59:27 AM
I see what you mean; the start of matter, how it all came to be is a mystery. It possibly always will be. However, I prefer to gain information on the world around me from solid facts, rather than faith.
Yes, me too... I especially hate 'Leaps of Faith'.
Quote from: bugfartboy on August 28, 2010, 11:46:02 AM
Fact: a man fell into a fire and lost 90% of all his skin. Fact: the doctors told him that they would need a skin transplant. Fact: as he was going into sugery, the doctors peeled away the bandages to find all the skin healed. How did that happen? The man was Christian.
So I'm going to assume that your Christian too...
Sorry, I wasn't paying attention... :D
Quote from: bugfartboy on August 28, 2010, 11:46:02 AM
Fact: a man fell into a fire and lost 90% of all his skin. Fact: the doctors told him that they would need a skin transplant. Fact: as he was going into sugery, the doctors peeled away the bandages to find all the skin healed. How did that happen? The man was Christian.
I do not believe these occurences are miracles, merely things about our world that we have yet to understand. Furthermore, I do not believe that a God who does nothing about war, natural disasters, starvation, and poverty would heal a single man. It doesn't make sense that the suffering or death of millions in a single event would be unattended, but the death of a single man would be.
There shouldn't be an end.
Most religions just don't make any sense.
Quote from: bugfartboy on August 28, 2010, 01:25:40 PM
Now I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away. Also there was no more sea.
-Revalations 21:1
I don't get your point.
Christianity is interesting, though I think there are some flaws (no offence)
I will eventually, after doing some research (sometimes I confuse religions and I don't want to offend people).
Quote from: Cypher on August 28, 2010, 01:39:46 PM
Christianity is interesting, though I think there are some flaws (no offence)
For example, I don't quite believe that, just because you don't believe in Jesus, you should be
eternally punished. No proof, and everlasting punishment for not believing in a religion while there are lots of other religions around to steal your attention...
Quote from: bugfartboy on August 28, 2010, 02:15:07 PM
There is proof. The perfection of the entire universe screams "THERE IS A GOD!!!!" at us.
Quote from: bugfartboy on August 28, 2010, 11:46:02 AM
Fact: a man fell into a fire and lost 90% of all his skin. Fact: the doctors told him that they would need a skin transplant. Fact: as he was going into sugery, the doctors peeled away the bandages to find all the skin healed. How did that happen? The man was Christian.
What about miracles? The scream it too. And if there is God, who by the way is perfect, does not lie, and is the same yesterday, today, and forever, says he sent his son to die in our place, why don't we believe him?
Perfection? I'm going to have to disagree. I believe in science, not religion.
First off, I'm liking this debate- its about something very personal, and important, but everybody is being very mature.
Next up bugfartboy,
Quote from: bugfartboy on August 28, 2010, 02:15:07 PM
There is proof. The perfection of the entire universe screams "THERE IS A GOD!!!!" at us.
Quote from: bugfartboy on August 28, 2010, 11:46:02 AM
Fact: a man fell into a fire and lost 90% of all his skin. Fact: the doctors told him that they would need a skin transplant. Fact: as he was going into sugery, the doctors peeled away the bandages to find all the skin healed. How did that happen? The man was Christian.
What about miracles? The scream it too. And if there is God, who by the way is perfect, does not lie, and is the same yesterday, today, and forever, says he sent his son to die in our place, why don't we believe him?
How about Islam? Or Judaism? Both believe in one God who made the universe, why should they suffer merely because they don't believe in Jesus also?
Quote from: bugfartboy on August 28, 2010, 03:08:03 PM
If I am correct (I am sorry if I am not and I offended anyone), the Jewish people are the decendents of Isreal, which is the nation God chose to call "His chosen people", therefore, I believe they will be spared. And to the Islamic faith: they do believe in Jesus. They belive that he will return and force all into the Islamic faith (am I religously correct?). They also believe that Allah, their God, is to distant to care about them. But If Allah is God, why does he/she/it not care? He/she/it created life right? I also have a tidbit of information that re-enforces my general idea. Just PM me for it.
To add to that its all the same really its just the fact of is it Jesus Mohammed or Abraham(not so sure it is for this one though.)
Quote from: bugfartboy on August 28, 2010, 03:08:03 PM
If I am correct (I am sorry if I am not and I offended anyone), the Jewish people are the decendents of Isreal, which is the nation God chose to call "His chosen people", therefore, I believe they will be spared. And to the Islamic faith: they do believe in Jesus. They belive that he will return and force all into the Islamic faith (am I religously correct?). They also believe that Allah, their God, is to distant to care about them. But If Allah is God, why does he/she/it not care? He/she/it created life right? I also have a tidbit of information that re-enforces my general idea. Just PM me for it.
Muslims believe Jesus exsisted, but was only a prophet. Mohammed is their savior, who they believe will return
Quote from: bugfartboy on August 28, 2010, 02:21:09 PM
Explain how its imperfect.
Well, it's true that it's all very convenient (a nice warm habitable planet, a relatively peaceful society, etc.), but if there is a God, then why does he let tons of innocent people suffer and die in accidents, etc? Why doesn't he come to us, or give us a vision (or something of the kind) to prove he exists and all the other religions are fake? Why do we have to eternally suffer just because we don't believe in him/her/it?
Quote from: Cypher on August 29, 2010, 01:30:15 AM
Well, it's true that it's all very convenient (a nice warm habitable planet, a relatively peaceful society, etc.)
It's not convenient, we live in an
enormous universe with tens of thousands of galaxies, odds are, there will be a civilized race on a habitable planet, am I right? Also, on a non/slightly-related not, since the universe is so gigantic, there
has to be other life out there, just not intelligent or curious enough to reach here yet.
Quote from: Duskling on August 29, 2010, 02:10:54 AM
Quote from: Cypher on August 29, 2010, 01:30:15 AM
Well, it's true that it's all very convenient (a nice warm habitable planet, a relatively peaceful society, etc.)
It's not convenient, we live in an enormous universe with tens of thousands of galaxies, odds are, there will be a civilized race on a habitable planet, am I right? Also, on a non/slightly-related not, since the universe is so gigantic, there has to be other life out there, just not intelligent or curious enough to reach here yet.
I meant the earth only.
Quote from: bugfartboy on August 29, 2010, 02:04:06 AM
Because it's life.
[spoiler]Recount of the Murder of John the Baptist
3 For Herod had laid hold of John and bound him, and put him in prison for the sake of Herodias, his brother Philip's wife. 4 Because John had said to him, "It is not lawful for you to have her." 5 And although he wanted to put him to death, he feared the multitude, because they counted him as a prophet.
6 But when Herod's birthday was celebrated, the daughter of Herodias danced before them and pleased Herod. 7 Therefore he promised with an oath to give her whatever she might ask.
8 So she, having been prompted by her mother, said, "Give me John the Baptist's head here on a platter."
9 And the king was sorry; nevertheless, because of the oaths and because of those who sat with him, he commanded it to be given to her. 10 So he sent and had John beheaded in prison. 11 And his head was brought on a platter and given to the girl, and she brought it to her mother. 12 Then his disciples came and took away the body and buried it, and went and told Jesus.
Matthew 14 [/spoiler]
Why did he let John the Baptist die? It's part of his plan. You never know when the end of your life is near. And as to why he doesn't speak directly to us, he created a famine. A famine of Him. Why? The Isrealites kept turning away from him, so like always he punished them. And that punishment affects everyone, even today. That is why he doesn't speak directly to us through a burning bush. [spoiler]Moses at the Burning Bush
1 Now Moses was tending the flock of Jethro his father-in-law, the priest of Midian. And he led the flock to the back of the desert, and came to Horeb, the mountain of God. 2 And the Angel of the Lord appeared to him in a flame of fire from the midst of a bush. So he looked, and behold, the bush was burning with fire, but the bush was not consumed. 3 Then Moses said, "I will now turn aside and see this great sight, why the bush does not burn."
4 So when the Lord saw that he turned aside to look, God called to him from the midst of the bush and said, "Moses, Moses!" And he said, "Here I am."
5 Then He said, "Do not draw near this place. Take your sandals off your feet, for the place where you stand is holy ground." 6 Moreover He said, "I am the God of your father—the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob." And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look upon God.
7 And the Lord said: "I have surely seen the oppression of My people who are in Egypt, and have heard their cry because of their taskmasters, for I know their sorrows. 8 So I have come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians, and to bring them up from that land to a good and large land, to a land flowing with milk and honey, to the place of the Canaanites and the Hittites and the Amorites and the Perizzites and the Hivites and the Jebusites. 9 Now therefore, behold, the cry of the children of Israel has come to Me, and I have also seen the oppression with which the Egyptians oppress them. 10 Come now, therefore, and I will send you to Pharaoh that you may bring My people, the children of Israel, out of Egypt." 11 But Moses said to God, "Who am I that I should go to Pharaoh, and that I should bring the children of Israel out of Egypt?" 12 So He said, "I will certainly be with you. And this shall be a sign to you that I have sent you: When you have brought the people out of Egypt, you shall serve God on this mountain." 13 Then Moses said to God, "Indeed, when I come to the children of Israel and say to them, 'The God of your fathers has sent me to you,' and they say to me, 'What is His name?' what shall I say to them?" 14 And God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM." And He said, "Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, 'I AM has sent me to you.' " 15 Moreover God said to Moses, "Thus you shall say to the children of Israel: 'The Lord God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you. This isMy name forever, and this is My memorial to all generations.' 16 Go and gather the elders of Israel together, and say to them, 'The Lord God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob, appeared to me, saying, "I have surely visited you and seen what is done to you in Egypt; 17 and I have said I will bring you up out of the affliction of Egypt to the land of the Canaanites and the Hittites and the Amorites and the Perizzites and the Hivites and the Jebusites, to a land flowing with milk and honey." ' 18 Then they will heed your voice; and you shall come, you and the elders of Israel, to the king of Egypt; and you shall say to him, 'The Lord God of the Hebrews has met with us; and now, please, let us go three days' journey into the wilderness, that we may sacrifice to the Lord our God.' 19 But I am sure that the king of Egypt will not let you go, no, not even by a mighty hand. 20 So I will stretch out My hand and strike Egypt with all My wonders which I will do in its midst; and after that he will let you go. 21 And I will give this people favor in the sight of the Egyptians; and it shall be, when you go, that you shall not go empty-handed. 22 But every woman shall ask of her neighbor, namely, of her who dwells near her house, articles of silver, articles of gold, and clothing; and you shall put them on your sons and on your daughters. So you shall plunder the Egyptians." [/spoiler]
You can't just say that! I assume that since you said that you have no argument against mine:
Quote from: Cypher on August 29, 2010, 01:30:15 AM
Quote from: bugfartboy on August 28, 2010, 02:21:09 PM
Explain how its imperfect.
Well, it's true that it's all very convenient (a nice warm habitable planet, a relatively peaceful society, etc.), but if there is a God, then why does he let tons of innocent people suffer and die in accidents, etc? Why doesn't he come to us, or give us a vision (or something of the kind) to prove he exists and all the other religions are fake? Why do we have to eternally suffer just because we don't believe in him/her/it?
I agree there can't be life without death, but how do explain all the innocent people dying?
Quote from: bugfartboy on August 29, 2010, 08:15:07 AM
Duskling: How do we know how large the universe is? Has anyone ever been to the edge of it to measure?
Science. First site i found on the matter. (http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/mystery_monday_040524.html) The universe is either infinite, or so large that it doesn't really matter, especially because the universe is constantly expanding. In fact, New planets are still being formed. (http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/imagegallery/image_feature_931.html)
Quote from: Cypher on August 29, 2010, 09:56:49 AM
I agree there can't be life without death, but how do explain all the innocent people dying?
people might be dying because god knows that a world of infinite people would be a worse thing than everyone dying when it's their time.
I meant the suffering/pain, not dying.
This debate is going nowhere...
Quote from: bugfartboy on August 29, 2010, 08:15:07 AM
Duskling: How do we know how large the universe is? Has anyone ever been to the edge of it to measure?
From the Wikipedia:
The diameter of the observable universe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observable_universe) is estimated to be about 28 billion parsecs (93 billion light-years), putting the edge of the observable universe at about 46-47 billion light-years away.
Quote from: Ertxiem on August 30, 2010, 06:23:17 AM
Quote from: bugfartboy on August 29, 2010, 08:15:07 AM
Duskling: How do we know how large the universe is? Has anyone ever been to the edge of it to measure?
From the Wikipedia:
The diameter of the observable universe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observable_universe) is estimated to be about 28 billion parsecs (93 billion light-years), putting the edge of the observable universe at about 46-47 billion light-years away.
My source (http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/mystery_monday_040524.html)
This says the universe is 156 billion light years wide. How old is the wiki page?
Doesn't matter how wide it is... all that matters is that you'll never get to the edge of the universe ;)
Quote from: bugfartboy on August 30, 2010, 11:19:44 AM
Cypher: is this getting off topic?
Oh and by the way, KZs back!!
It is, but I don't mind.
I do, however. Too much off-topic going everywhere- folks, let's try to keep it organised, eh? ;)
No religion, being on-topic.
Indeed- actually most active topics are going off-topic.
On-topic: I'd love to find out Craig's religion out of pure curiosity.
Quote from: Cypher on August 30, 2010, 12:10:48 PM
Indeed- actually most active topics are going off-topic.
On-topic: I'd love to find out Craig's religion out of pure curiosity.
He himself said he's not telling. Sadly.
Quote from: bugfartboy on August 30, 2010, 12:12:36 PM
Quote from: Cypher on August 30, 2010, 12:10:48 PM
Indeed- actually most active topics are going off-topic.
On-topic: I'd love to find out Craig's religion out of pure curiosity.
He himself said he's not telling. Sadly.
I know, but I'm hoping to find out in the far future (he said he's not telling because it could influence the way we think about TSoG, so I'll try to discover his beliefs long after TSoG is on the market).
This topic and the 'Life after death' seem to be merging... :)
I'd prefer if you didn't, though. It's good to keep each thread focused on a certain aspect of life (or death) to help us discuss each individually.
I consider myself to be an atheist. My views on life after death and religion are quite close to what KZ said (http://sinisterdesign.net/forum/index.php?topic=571.msg19431#msg19431) in life after death, both (http://sinisterdesign.net/forum/index.php?topic=571.msg19447#msg19447) posts.
I am a taoist.
My Beliefs
There is no proof either way that any Religion is right or wrong. I agree that, it is highly unlikely, but, I cannot prove nor disprove it. (This is called Agnosticism)
I believe that this is the most logical belief system.
P.S. ( I was raised Christian fairly loosely so I CHOSE to believe this. I go to a Catholic School so I came upon this 'revelation' when I was approximately 12.
I'm atheistic existentialist, yes such a thing exists.
Space is just another form of energy, as is mass. What perfection does anyone see? There is no perfection that there is not a reason for. The earth loses a couple of milliseconds of its day every time there's an earthquake, it has a moon that is slowly spiraling outward, and there are other planets capable of supporting life out there. If that doesn't disprove most religions, chew on this; 99% of religions are cop-outs. There are no obsevervable cop-outs in real life, only complicated explanations that are all different, whereas they exist all the time in the unexplained-- as soon as we figure it out, however, there a much more complicated solution. Stars: God did it. The Sun: god did it. Everthing else: God did it. No one can plan anything well in 7 days; some people can't even get a party right in a month. Paradise? A world? Forget it.
Religion is a way to explain the unexplained, and by that explanation, make people feel at peace, thinking that the world is all planned out, and nothing happens by accident. A bunch of teenagers mobbed together today, and killed a bartender in Louisiana. Few people heard about it; no one cared except maybe me and a few other people. Why the hell would anyone plan that? And please, no one give me the "We may never understand the mysteries of God" spiel. Really, if that's true, why do ministers, priests, and religious congregations even bother to figure it out? Only because if they can figure out why, then they don't feel so deprived of a reason. There are reasons; you're just not looking for them. Buddhism is an exception, minus the mythology of it. All that zen meditating stuff; they have the right idea.
And if you're going to ask silly questions about where stuff came from, look it up first, and then ask me.
Quote from: Duckling on September 24, 2010, 03:31:36 PM
No one can plan anything well in 7 days; some people can't even get a party right in a month. Paradise? A world? Forget it.
In the first book of the Old Testament (Genesis) explains the creation of the world. Many people believe Genesis 1:1 was how the world was created.
False! If most people had taken to time to research and learn about the bible properly, like I have, they would have found out the in the Hebrew bible (In Genesis itself) there are several points where there are, "Toledoths". "Toldedoths," are a Hebrew word meaning, "these are the generations of ..." which basically means "This is how it goes down". Now you can find these Toledoths in many places in Genesis, however, a Toledoth is not found in the beginning of Genesis 1:1- but in Genesis 1:2. If you don't know, Genesis 1:2 gives another account on the creation of the world. I recommend people to read Genesis 1:2.
Now you might be asking, then what is the point of Genesis 1:1? I believe it is an introduction to god and his reign. It also shows that the bible is not a book of science but a book of knowledge/poetry. It is poetical because if you look at Genesis 1:1 you can see that god created the world in
six days (on the seventh he rested). Look down below to see what I mean:
Day One: Light and Darkness
Day Four: Sun, Stars and Moon
Day Two: Water and Skies
Day Five: Birds and Fish
Day Three: Land and Vegetation
Day Six: Mammals and Man
Is anyone seeing the pattern here? He first creates space and fills on its corresponding day after. I just think it is neat and poetical.
So there you have it, the beginning of time most people believe in, is not true.
My personal believes are: Agnostic, which as Ersatz Man rightfully said, is a religion where you believe the existence of a(any) God(s) is un-knowable. For with-in the infinite realms that comprise of the universe, there could always be something controlling my life. However, I like to believe that my destiny in is my own hands, and not someone else's.
Mine is the opposite, I believe in no higher power, but I do have a purpose in life.
I am a christian. As for your quote, Duckling
QuoteSpace is just another form of energy, as is mass. What perfection does anyone see? There is no perfection that there is not a reason for. The earth loses a couple of milliseconds of its day every time there's an earthquake, it has a moon that is slowly spiraling outward, and there are other planets capable of supporting life out there.
The perfection that I see is the rules that the world follows. The laws of planetary motion that allows us to see the night sky as it looked thousands of years ago. The location of earth that allows our planet to exist and support life. Even the fact that the moon makes a total eclipse of the sun, which seems to be for our own benefit. The universe follows laws. That is the perfection. As for why I believe in God, at some point, you must have faith in things that you can not know. You just end up having to trust what you're told. For example, you do not know, and you really can not know, about the origin of matter in the universe. You have to have faith, belief in what you can't see.
And for the other part of your quote
QuoteA bunch of teenagers mobbed together today, and killed a bartender in Louisiana. Few people heard about it; no one cared except maybe me and a few other people. Why the hell would anyone plan that? And please, no one give me the "We may never understand the mysteries of God" spiel.
I can tell you why that happened. People are messed up. God chose to give us free will because the benefits outweigh the drawbacks. There is nothing great about everyone obeying and doing the right thing when they have no choice. There is something great about people choosing to do the right thing despite living in a messed up world.
I know I might not have made much sense; sorry, but it is late and I will probably go to bed soon.
Quote from: Bugfartboy the Humble on September 25, 2010, 12:07:58 AM
You made great sense yogc!!! Thanks!!! I understood every word. But as Duckling and I currently have an agreement on not to argue theology, I shall merely watch. But I do leave this.
Proverbs 1:14
To the Chief Musician. A Psalm of David. The fool has said in his heart,"There is no God." They are corrupt, They have done abominable works, There is none who does good.
Proverbs 18:2
A fool has no delight in understanding,
But in expressing his own heart.
Isaiah 32:6-7
For the foolish person will speak foolishness,
And his heart will work iniquity:
To practice ungodliness,
To utter error against the Lord,
To keep the hungry unsatisfied,
And he will cause the drink of the thirsty to fail.
Also the schemes of the schemer are evil;
He devises wicked plans
To destroy the poor with lying words,
Even when the needy speaks justice.
Well, that makes me sound pretty evil, but I give when I can, and I don't tell people not to believe God, or make Him look bad to people, I'm just expressing my right as a human being to believe or not to believe, and I choose to believe that I make my world, and that I will not be judged on what I make of it. You can, of course, believe in Him, and I don't think less of you for it, it's your faith, I don't have a right to discredit it. That was Duskie-Poo's outlook on life, ladies in gentlemen, Duskie-Poo is a... realist? Is that it? Yes, I believe so.
Quote from: Bugfartboy the Humble on September 25, 2010, 12:31:24 AM
He gave us that right of freedom and I don't think any less of you Duskling. I'm just saying some of what the bible says on the matter. Man WOULD has been perfect had it not been for the very first sin by Adam.
Creation in Genesis and the Fall of Man: Spoiler Style!!
[spoiler=Genesis][spoiler=Chapter 1]The History of Creation
1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.
3 Then God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light. 4 And God saw the light, that it was good; and God divided the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. So the evening and the morning were the first day.
6 Then God said, "Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters." 7 Thus God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which wereabove the firmament; and it was so. 8 And God called the firmament Heaven. So the evening and the morning were the second day.
9 Then God said, "Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear"; and it was so. 10 And God called the dry land Earth, and the gathering together of the waters He called Seas. And God saw that it was good. 11 Then God said, "Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb that yields seed, and the fruit tree that yields fruit according to its kind, whose seed is in itself, on the earth"; and it was so. 12 And the earth brought forth grass, the herb that yields seed according to its kind, and the tree that yields fruit, whose seed is in itself according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 13 So the evening and the morning were the third day. 14 Then God said, "Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs and seasons, and for days and years; 15 and let them be for lights in the firmament of the heavens to give light on the earth"; and it was so. 16 Then God made two great lights: the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night. He madethe stars also. 17 God set them in the firmament of the heavens to give light on the earth, 18 and to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 So the evening and the morning were the fourth day.
20 Then God said, "Let the waters abound with an abundance of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the face of the firmament of the heavens." 21 So God created great sea creatures and every living thing that moves, with which the waters abounded, according to their kind, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 And God blessed them, saying, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth." 23 So the evening and the morning were the fifth day.
24 Then God said, "Let the earth bring forth the living creature according to its kind: cattle and creeping thing and beast of the earth, each according to its kind"; and it was so. 25 And God made the beast of the earth according to its kind, cattle according to its kind, and everything that creeps on the earth according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.
26 Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." 27 So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. 28 Then God blessed them, and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth."
29 And God said, "See, I have given you every herb that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed; to you it shall be for food. 30 Also, to every beast of the earth, to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, in which there islife, I have given every green herb for food"; and it was so. 31 Then God saw everything that He had made, and indeed it was very good. So the evening and the morning were the sixth day.[/spoiler][/spoiler]
Thank you for understanding, Bugfartboy, I know enough of the Bible that Adam sinned when he stole an... apple, I believe, which God had forbidden them to eat, it was called "The Forbidden Fruit," no? Then he lied and blamed Eve for it, and I don't know much more of the story after that.
[spoiler=Off-Topic]Check out The Incident, I edited the first chapter to give a tiny bit more back-story, and added a second chapter! (http://s3.postimage.org/UonM9.png)[/spoiler]
The King James does have a certain eloquence and poetry to it. No futher comment.
By the way, if Christianity IS true, when I die, I can say to God 'All the sins I did was because you programmed my basic personality and you controlled the events that would happen in my life.' Also, you know that Catholic School I go to? I learned that, apparently, since Jesus died for us, EVERY single sin we ever do is sort of 'absorbed' by that. I questioned my R.E. Teacher and, according to her, Hitler could be in heaven right now.
WOW, that was long winded. Just thought I'd throw that in.
That's awesome! I like that sort of Christianity; it seems inclusive, rather than exclusive like many kinds. But not enough to convert. Maybe later...
I don't see why religion and biology are mutually exclusive.
Because the findings and conclusions one gets from biology seriously contradict with the core beliefs of most religions, and those who are educated to become biologists find it logically impossible for there to be a big ol' God up there with no oxygen and no precedent; those who are trained to become preachers find it theologically impossible for there to have been big lizardy things way before the earth even existed.
Quote from: Duckling on October 29, 2010, 08:18:15 AM
That's awesome! I like that sort of Christianity; it seems inclusive, rather than exclusive like many kinds. But not enough to convert. Maybe later...
I wasn't trying to convert you, I don't believe it either.
Quote from: Bugfartboy on October 29, 2010, 05:44:30 PM
Not all preachers believe so. Some believe that they were wiped out merely a few centuries ago. Has it occured to you that the medival "dragons" might have been no more than Dinos? Many species go extinct each year.
That is very improbable, if that were the case, then there would be no fossils, only bones. It takes thousands of years for the remains of an animal to become fossilised, you know.
This is the reason that science and religion are mutually exclusive. If you understand science, the bibical stories no longer make sense. You, buggy, do not know what you are talking about when you make these scienetific points, and that is the only reason you can use science and religon at the same time.
Point 1: Dinos = Dragons. This is a foolish point, as the evidence for the muscle builds of dinosaurs suggest not only not place for wings, but also dinosaur bones are too heavy to fly. The reason birds can fly is that they have extremely light bones. The only place I have seen a theory like this is Dragonology, and if this is where you get your science, we have an issue.
Point 2: This flood would have eroded the soil, making fossils less deep. I cannot comprehend how you think that a flood would make more dirt.
Quote from: MikeW781 on October 30, 2010, 09:34:00 PM
Point 1: Dinos = Dragons. This is a foolish point, as the evidence for the muscle builds of dinosaurs suggest not only not place for wings, but also dinosaur bones are too heavy to fly. The reason birds can fly is that they have extremely light bones. The only place I have seen a theory like this is Dragonology, and if this is where you get your science, we have an issue.
Actually, Dinosaurs did eventually become birds (can't remember the name) and, because of that, there will have been a few generations of dinosaurs that could fly.
BTW, dinosaur fossils a small as chickens have been found.
Personally, I'm guessing that Dinos went extinct shortly after the flood. That's the first mention of season changes, and since dinos needed a warm climate to survive, I'm guessing a lot of them died in the first winter.
Quote from: Ersatz Man on October 29, 2010, 08:13:23 AM
Also, you know that Catholic School I go to? I learned that, apparently, since Jesus died for us, EVERY single sin we ever do is sort of 'absorbed' by that. I questioned my R.E. Teacher and, according to her, Hitler could be in heaven right now.
Personally, I think that is an attempt to "sell Christianity" by diluting it down to nothing so that no one will be offended by it.
I doubt Hitler was a true Christian. If he was, then I would be extremely surprised. But, you are right. No middle ground.
I say that Hitler only believed he was a true Christian, and felt that, as such, he had a right to exterminate Jews because of their beliefs.
I didn't know that he thought he was a Christian. I very much doubt he was.
No, I meant he was Christian, but thought of himself as a "Super Christian," and, as such, as previously stated, thought it was his right to destroy Judaism because of his beliefs.
Well, maybe Hitler did believe he was a Christian, but I don't. I don't think a Christian would arrange a genocide.
Well, what happens to someone who thinks they're doing the right thing (therefore pleasing God) but they are actually doing the wrong thing? e.g. helping an injured serial killer therefore killing lives or killing a serial killer to save lives. They can both be viewed as good or bad. Hitler believed that he was doing the right thing. He must have stuck by the old saying 'the ends justify the means.' So, people like that just find themselves in the wrong circumstances, so, will they do to heaven or hell? Good and evil are almost never clear. Also, what about a kind, lets say, buddhist. He/she was a good person but didn't believe in God or Christ. So,according to the bible, that person should go to hell. Will he/she? Will he/she not? Things that can be viewed differently by diferent people. God's one being, (3 if you believe in the trinity) how does someone's morals in their life be decided? Or, is it just the thought that counts? Debate.
Well, they get old. Then, something very interesting happens; first, their heart stops beating. Then, their brain promptly suffers a serious infarction, as there is no way to get blood to the brain without the heart being functional. During this process, the person dies the same way they would through suffocation or asphyxiation; they have a sense of euphoria, and then everything stops.
Then they go take a dirt nap. And stay there. Or at least their body does. Whatever made them who they were stopped being at their death.
Silly humans :P immortal souls are for Greek and Roman gods.
Quote from: Duckling on November 01, 2010, 09:08:25 PM
Well, they get old. Then, something very interesting happens; first, their heart stops beating. Then, their brain promptly suffers a serious infarction, as there is no way to get blood to the brain without the heart being functional. During this process, the person dies the same way they would through suffocation or asphyxiation; they have a sense of euphoria, and then everything stops.
Then they go take a dirt nap. And stay there. Or at least their body does. Whatever made them who they were stopped being at their death.
Silly humans :P immortal souls are for Greek and Roman gods.
That would be the case but what if the brain was preserved?
Quote from: Bugfartboy on November 01, 2010, 09:27:46 PM
Quote from: Ersatz Man on November 01, 2010, 10:26:27 AM
Well, what happens to someone who thinks they're doing the right thing (therefore pleasing God) but they are actually doing the wrong thing? e.g. helping an injured serial killer therefore killing lives or killing a serial killer to save lives. They can both be viewed as good or bad. Hitler believed that he was doing the right thing. He must have stuck by the old saying 'the ends justify the means.' So, people like that just find themselves in the wrong circumstances, so, will they do to heaven or hell? Good and evil are almost never clear. Also, what about a kind, lets say, buddhist. He/she was a good person but didn't believe in God or Christ. So,according to the bible, that person should go to hell. Will he/she? Will he/she not? Things that can be viewed differently by diferent people. God's one being, (3 if you believe in the trinity) how does someone's morals in their life be decided? Or, is it just the thought that counts? Debate.
Romans 3:23
For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God
NKJV
Nothing we do ourselves can match the holiness of God. Thus, that person would ultimately go to hell no matter what they had done.
We sin, we don't win.
But on Jesus's side, we can survive the tide.
Completely agree. You don't get to heaven by "doing good", because you already failed. One way to describe it would be like getting a zero on a one question quiz that was 50% of your grade, with no make up grades. You can do good on the other 50%, but you still fail.
Quote from: Bugfartboy on November 02, 2010, 10:14:02 PM
One sin is all it takes. The very first and boom. Access denied. Go straight to jail. Do not pass go, do not collect eternal life. And there you stay until Jesus comes along. By then, you would most likely love jail and never want to leave. But he offers you the get put of jail free card. Expires: Never. But it'll change you. No doubt about it. He'll even give you an unlimited supply of business cards to give to others in jail. Then they give him a call if they want. Then if they accept, they start doing the same thing. But those who refuse until death, get sent to mega jail. No escape once your there. Hell. Now if life really were a big game of Monopoly, would you take the card? Or refuse and go to jail forever?
So... what you're saying is, most likely, all of us go to Hell, then, when Jesus decides you have learned your lesson and it would be hard to refuse his "get out of jail free card," he comes down and offers it to you, and if you refuse you stay there forever, or will the chance come again?
Quote from: Bugfartboy on November 02, 2010, 10:43:36 PM
[spoiler]Ask me about the end of the world! It's one of my favorite topics to discuss. Just don't ask when it is. No man knows the day nor the hour.[/spoiler]
Sure, go ahead, but if no man knows the day nor the hour, how would you know?
Ok, how would you know when the end of the world is?
Quote from: Bugfartboy on November 02, 2010, 10:50:10 PM
The Lord Jesus gave us signs to look for. Give me a couple minutes and I'll find them for you.
-Update-
Quote from: Matthew 24:36
But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, but My Father only.
This is why I say no man knows the day nor the hour.
Here is where Jesus reveals the signs amd more.
[spoiler]Quote from: Matthew 24
The Temple to Be Destroyed
1 Then Jesus went out and departed from the temple, and His disciples came up to show Him the buildings of the temple. 2 And Jesus said to them, "Do you not see all these things? Assuredly, I say to you, not one stone shall be left here upon another, that shall not be thrown down."
The Disciples' Two Questions
3 Now as He sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, "Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?"
The Tribulation
4 And Jesus answered and said to them: "Take heed that no one deceives you. 5 For many will come in My name, saying, 'I am the Christ,' and will deceive many. 6 And you will hear of wars and rumors of wars. See that you are not troubled; for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. 7 For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. And there will be famines, pestilences, and earthquakes in various places. 8 All these are the beginning of sorrows.
9 "Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and kill you, and you will be hated by all nations for My name's sake. 10 And then many will be offended, will betray one another, and will hate one another. 11 Then many false prophets will rise up and deceive many. 12 And because lawlessness will abound, the love of many will grow cold. 13 But he who endures to the end shall be saved. 14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come. 15 "Therefore when you see the 'abomination of desolation,' spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place" (whoever reads, let him understand), 16 "then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. 17 Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take anything out of his house. 18 And let him who is in the field not go back to get his clothes. 19 But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! 20 And pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the Sabbath. 21 For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be. 22 And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect's sake those days will be shortened.
23 "Then if anyone says to you, 'Look, here is the Christ!' or 'There!' do not believe it. 24 For false christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. 25 See, I have told you beforehand.
26 "Therefore if they say to you, 'Look, He is in the desert!' do not go out; or 'Look, He is in the inner rooms!' do not believe it.
The Second Coming
27 For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. 28 For wherever the carcass is, there the eagles will be gathered together.
29 "Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
Parable of the Fig Tree
32 "Now learn this parable from the fig tree: When its branch has already become tender and puts forth leaves, you know that summer is near. 33 So you also, when you see all these things, know that it is near—at the doors! 34 Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place. 35 Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away.
Illustration of the Days of Noah
36 "But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, but My Father only. 37 But as the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. 38 For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, 39 and did not know until the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. 40 Then two men will be in the field: one will be taken and the other left. 41 Two women will be grinding at the mill: one will be taken and the other left. 42 Watch therefore, for you do not know what hour your Lord is coming. 43 But know this, that if the master of the house had known what hour the thief would come, he would have watched and not allowed his house to be broken into. 44 Therefore you also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect.
Illustration of the Two Servants
45 "Who then is a faithful and wise servant, whom his master made ruler over his household, to give them food in due season? 46 Blessed is that servant whom his master, when he comes, will find so doing. 47 Assuredly, I say to you that he will make him ruler over all his goods. 48 But if that evil servant says in his heart, 'My master is delaying his coming,' 49 and begins to beat his fellow servants, and to eat and drink with the drunkards, 50 the master of that servant will come on a day when he is not looking for him and at an hour that he is not aware of, 51 and will cut him in two and appoint him his portion with the hypocrites. There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
[/spoiler]
Let me just get what type of Christian you are, please answer these questions:
1. Are you a roman catholic, protestant or other?
2. Are you a fundamentalist?
3. What is your view on homosexuality?
Hmm... I have been gone for a while, a lot to catch up on. As for this one, I honestly thought someone would have said something a long time ago to get this page locked. I'm impressed. But anyways, the reason I post here is to ask bug if he follows all of Leviticus if he believes in 18:22. Including not eating pork, never touching the skin of a pig, abstaining from eating shellfish, using contraceptives, wearing blends of fabric, wearing gold, banning all ancestors (even past the tenth generation) of bastards (people born of an unmarried couple) from entering church and prayer, etc.
The idiocy displayed by those who believe homosexuality will send you to hell continuosly astounds me. I'm straight myself, but have a few gay friends. The people who make fun of them for it, for whatever reason, are not using logic. They either do it because they cannot grasp the idea that some people are born that way, or because they believe that God doesn't like it. Either way, they are not thinking about it. It is a condition you are born with, just like blond hair or black skin. Occasionally, people chose to be gay, but that is their choice. No true, rightous God would condem people to burn for eternity because of the way He made them.
As a side note, if you take the Bible literally, you honestly don't deserve an opinion because you are clearly just accepting whatever is shoved under your nose without a second though. The Bible contains passages describing all sorts of nonsense, hypocrisy, and inaccuracy.
http://www.thebluesnake.com/stupid-bible-quotes.html
http://www.evilbible.com/Evil%20Bible%20Quotes.htm
http://www.experienceproject.com/stories/Want-To-Burn-The-Bible/806982
I was hoping you'd ask.
And you have yet to adress my other points
Actually it is a translation error, you are supposed to give ridiculously to god, so that you are on your knees praying to him to make it through the month. Also: it is a Jewish tradition to give 10% of everything to god.
Sorry to go back the earlier post (got busy), but I just wanted to say one more thing for Leviticus. As many Christian friends and old pastors have told me, the Bible is a book of stories that were made to help people with their lives. And as you said,
Quote from: Bugfartboy on November 03, 2010, 05:41:41 PM
There have been changes as the centuries go by. If I remember correctly, there was a point in which the Lord specifically told Paul to eat pork.
Which means that some of it has been out dated. The stories are no longer helpful today because we live in such a different world. Back then, eating shellfish or pork was hazardous as they didn't have the food safety we have now. Wearing multi-fabric clothing was normally not as good as all cotton or some other substance as they weren't as high quality as we have today. So isn't it possible that 18:22 is outdated as well?
Back then, there weren't many people. So to 'waste' sperm in a non child conceiving manner was not a good thing. You needed to procreate, pass on your name, and make more people so that we as a species would survive. But nowadays there are really too many people on the Earth. There are so many of us that a catastrophe is highly unlikely to wipe us out as a species. So isn't it possible that 18:22 is just as outdated as the others and is not a concern in modern times?
So you are as opposed to people who wear multi-fabric clothing and wear gold as much as you are to homosexuals?
Personally, I'm not. Believe it or not, most of God's commandments in Leviticus were for his people's own good (needless to say, a good amount of the time they did not follow them). Back in the day, eating pork would not be a good idea. Back in the day, people drank wine because the water was often contaminated. A lot of his commandments still stand (do not commit adultery), but I think you have to check into the intent of the commandment sometimes to see how applicable it is.
Quote from: MikeW781 on November 03, 2010, 06:11:51 PM
The idiocy displayed by those who believe homosexuality will send you to hell continuosly astounds me. I'm straight myself, but have a few gay friends. The people who make fun of them for it, for whatever reason, are not using logic. They either do it because they cannot grasp the idea that some people are born that way, or because they believe that God doesn't like it. Either way, they are not thinking about it. It is a condition you are born with, just like blond hair or black skin. Occasionally, people chose to be gay, but that is their choice. No true, rightous God would condem people to burn for eternity because of the way He made them.
As a side note, if you take the Bible literally, you honestly don't deserve an opinion because you are clearly just accepting whatever is shoved under your nose without a second though. The Bible contains passages describing all sorts of nonsense, hypocrisy, and inaccuracy.
I know some gay people. They choose to be that way. They were not born that way. They went from straight to gay. One gay person I know was absolutely obsessed with me about a year before she turned gay. Same thing happened with a person who liked one of my friends.
If people who took the Bible literally just accepted what was shoved under their noses, I, and probably several other Christians would be Atheist/Evolutionist.
Do you know what the ciriculum is where I live? Evolution. Aetheism. And they fail you if you refuse to believe it, even if you learn it. That shows me desperation.
Quote from: Matthew 24:9
"Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and kill you, and you will be hated by all nations for My name's sake.
It seems that that's what's happenins in the school ciriculum.
Quote from: Bugfartboy on November 03, 2010, 08:35:35 PM
Do you know what the ciriculum is where I live? Evolution. Aetheism. And they fail you if you refuse to believe it, even if you learn it. That shows me desperation.
Wow, that's rough. Most of my teachers were Christians, and will basically tell you, "yes, I know you don't believe it, I don't believe it either, but since scientist have got to have some fancy answer for everything, this is what's in the text book, so learn it, then we'll go to something else."
Quote from: Bugfartboy on November 03, 2010, 08:35:35 PM
Quote from: Matthew 24:9
"Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and kill you, and you will be hated by all nations for My name's sake.
It seems that that's what's happenins in the school ciriculum.
You aren't dying, but tribulation... happens all the time. And others are dying...
Just because they havn't killed us doesn't mean they won't. In the end they will. But atheism won't be the cause. Mass execution. Worse than it was in the beginning. Stoning is jut the tip of the iceberg. When the time comes and yogc or I don't post ever again within a few days, know it to be true.
Quote from: Robert PirsigWhen one person suffers from a delusion it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called religion.
Quote from: Douglas Adams"Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?"
Quote from: Cypher on November 07, 2010, 02:51:50 PM
Quote from: Robert PirsigWhen one person suffers from a delusion it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called religion.
So, you believe we, and all other religions, are deluded?
For the record, I do not mean this in a harsh way, and am not inferring that your opinion is wrong. I just want to know your opinion of other religions.
Required Viewing for those who put down atheism (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNDZb0KtJDk)
This video explains my stance far better than I could.
So, as far as I can tell, you believe that, while a god may exist, there is not enough evidence/no reason to believe in him. In addition, you hold the Biblical God as self-refuting and false. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Quote from: yogc elf on November 07, 2010, 08:34:59 PM
So, as far as I can tell, you believe that, while a god may exist, there is not enough evidence/no reason to believe in him. In addition, you hold the Biblical God as self-refuting and false. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Indeed.
Quote from: Cypher on November 07, 2010, 02:51:50 PM
Quote from: Robert PirsigWhen one person suffers from a delusion it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called religion.
Quote from: Douglas Adams"Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?"
Sorry, I was a bit unclear. I didn't mean to make a point, just that they were interesting quotes. :-[
Quote from: MikeW781 on November 07, 2010, 05:54:21 PM
Required Viewing for those who put down atheism (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNDZb0KtJDk)
This video explains my stance far better than I could.
Thank you, someone finally showing some common sense and individuality!
My iPod, which is the only thing I can get you tube on, keeps telling me it can't load the movie. So sorry.
gah. why can't you get movie on your main comp?
Parent's blocked YouTube. K9 Internet Security strikes again.
Well, if you can't get to the video, I'll sum it up best I can.
The video states that it is possible to not have a belief whatsoever about the existence of a god. That is, an atheist can lack belief about a god. They don't necessarily believe that it is impossible for a god to exist, but if the claim "God exist", god meaning a supreme being that created the universe, they find the claim "Irresolvable", since "No procedure available to us could reliably establish the existence or non-existence of such an unscientific deity." If the claim "God exist" is made, with god meaning the biblical God, they would find the claim "demonstrably false", stating that, "no being can be regarded as perfect if it needs to be worshiped." (I don't know where he got the needs to be worshiped). But, anyways, they take the above quote as an example as to why they think the biblical God is false. Depending on what you meant by "God" when you make the claim "God exists", you would get a different outcome. Because of the varied output, the simplest way to describe this would be the lack of belief in gods. This definition of atheism (lack of belief in gods) is resisted by some people, who instead wish to define it as a belief that no god exist in order to make atheism seem like a position of faith. The narrator of the video notes that if a person feels at a disadvantage because their beliefs are "faith based and insupportable by logic or evidence" it is much easier to say that those who lack the person's belief have a faith based position than "facing up to the burden of truth" the person gives themselves when they insist others belief as they do. However, the narrator notes that one doesn't have to belief no gods exist "to recognize and expose theistic claims as indefensible." He notes that a person who believes no gods exist (strong atheist) or someone who is just unconvinced may both reject any claims of a god. Even if atheism was defined the belief that no gods exist, there would still be the same number of nonbelievers "dismantling theistic claims." The narrator states that people who fixate on strong atheist are either misidentifying or trying to distract people from their "real problem", which he states to be that "their claims have no valid foundation" and collapse under close scrutiny. The narrator notes that some people say that we would have to classify rocks and dogs as atheist. The narrator points out that we are dealing with people, not rocks and dogs, and that fact should be understood, just like if someone asked you, when you where at a party, to "identify which ones weren't married", you wouldn't say the coffee table. He also points out the suffix -ist denotes a personal noun, hence a person, not a dog. The narrator notes that people start life with a default lack of belief in God. He notes that while the default position is not always desirable, to move a person away from the default, you, not the person in the default position has to provide justification. To convince someone that gods exist, the burden of proof is on the person trying to convince. The narrator notes that some people say that "One cannot lack belief in gods because one needs to believe something about gods in order to reject them." This claim fails if you substitute another noun in the place of god. The narrator, and presumably other atheist, reject theistic claims, stating that the burden of proof falls on those who belief in gods, since the said god doesn't do much to prove his existence, and he can reject the claims made by people due to "defective reasoning, defective definition, or lack of evidence." He notes that some people complain that defining atheism as a lack of beliefs says next to nothing about the atheist attitudes. However, someone saying they're a theist doesn't tell you much either. The solution to this problem is to ask the atheist more questions about their beliefs (like I did not so long ago). He notes that not all atheist "will find another conversation about gods a worthwhile use of their time", especially if the subject has been brought up earlier in the day. Some theist note that some atheist are fervent in their discussions of their believe (or lack of it), and that fervency doesn't come from a lack of belief. The narrator responds by saying that a good deal of the fervency is from the hostility directed at atheist for not believing in gods. Some other reasons for the fervency include: theist attempts to "distort our education", theist attempts to "monopolize government", and theist attempts to ostracize atheist for "not participating in their rituals." He notes that it would be surprising to not see any other group react with the same fervency if they were treated with the same disrespect. He also notes that some of the fervency comes from "a wider sense of injustice in the way human beings are being treated around the world." Some examples include: church leaders using their power to cover up child sexual abuse cases, children dying from torture and neglect after being branded as witches or demon possessed, adulterers being stoned to death, and gay people being hanged, all in the name of an entity which, according to the narrator, cannot be proved exist. He brings up a possible scenario of humans being sacrificed to appease a sun god, and asks, "Which of us would not see the dangerous ignorance in that bloody reasoning?" The narrator finds it grimly surreal to find himself on a planet where "so much wisdom is available, but on which people are still killing people in the name of gods." The narrator notes that people cannot justify their actions by claiming it's what "any god wants", and that "they are accountable for their choices." He states that humans have the potential to end all life on the planet, and that with power comes responsibility. However, he also states that with responsibility comes power. He ends by stating, "We alone fill our world with love and compassion or fear and violence and that the solution to our problems lie in no hands but yours and mine."
I'll comment on this later. Typing it up was a pain.
Communists in China: They believe in no god and have held children at gunpoint telling them to trample a small wooden cross that was given to them. If they walked around it, showing respect, they would be shot. Guess how many were killed in the name of "No Gods!"
First up Buggy, if we get into historical misuse of religious views, this thread will reach a scary length. Honestly, every religion has idiots who misuse the doctrine to harm others, even though they are violating the doctrine they are allegedly serving. Think the crusades, the abortion clinic raids, the murder of the gays, etc. Catholicism is no exception. The people who misinterpret a doctrine cannot be said to be followers of it.
Next up, use either spiceface.info (http://spiceface.info) or nosepincher.com (http://nosepincher.com), two proxy sites that get around web filters successfully and legally. Then you can watch the video.
People have been killed in the name of gods, but, like buggy said, the reverse has happened. You can go either way with it, but personally, I blame the person that does the killing. I do, for the most part, agree with what he says about accountability. People are accountable for their own actions. That means that a person cannot claim before God that they shouldn't be held accountable for what they have done because God made them that way. That would be like a man guilty of murder claiming that he shouldn't go to jail because his genes, his past experience, and the world in general has made them a murder.
I just meant that the idiocy of one person has nothing to do with the religon the killer claims to represent, and then went on to say how Buggy's statement on atheists killing people is therefore irrelevant.
It wasn't just one person. It was several.
That doesn't matter.
So a group of people mass murdering little children doesn't matter? What's wrong with you?
Quote from: Ersatz Man on November 12, 2010, 03:40:11 AM
That doesn't matter.
Quote from: Ersatz Man on November 12, 2010, 03:40:11 AM
That doesn't matter.
I think he was defending my point that both sides commit atrocites, and that they cannot be said to represent their side as these horrible actions are not condoned by the point of view they claim to represent. These people have nothing to do with the main body of atheists, just as not all Muslims are terrorists and not all Catholics kill abortionists and homosexuals
Quote from: MikeW781 on November 12, 2010, 01:38:20 PM
Quote from: Ersatz Man on November 12, 2010, 03:40:11 AM
That doesn't matter.
Quote from: Ersatz Man on November 12, 2010, 03:40:11 AM
That doesn't matter.
I think he was defending my point that both sides commit atrocites, and that they cannot be said to represent their side as these horrible actions are not condoned by the point of view they claim to represent. These people have nothing to do with the main body of atheists, just as not all Muslims are terrorists and not all Catholics kill abortionists and homosexuals
That's exactly what I was saying. Don't jump the gun so fast Bugfartboy!
Sorry. The way you just left it on it's own suggested that you care nothing for human life. We are worth more than blue-green foamy pond scum you know.
Well, I have to admit that did sound kinda bad, but I get your point now. A person is accountable for his own actions, not his faith, or lack of one. There have been bad atheist, bad people claiming to be Christians, and bad Christians. But, regardless of how relatively good or bad someone is, all have sinned, and fallen short of the glory of God. Atheist or Christian.
Me being the slacker that I am, I haven't looked up what verse "All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God." is. It's somewhere in Romans.
Gah. Dontcha know it's Romans 3:23? And don't hate on me and gang up on me. I'm going away for the weekend.
Who would want to be as glorious as a God that is so controlling, demanding, creepy, and downright insecure?
(Dictates your fate, asks tithes, tells people to commit atrocious crimes against women/children, and wants constant worship so people don't see the flaws he supposedly doesn't have)
Quote from: Duckling on November 12, 2010, 11:24:26 PM
Who would want to be as glorious as a God that is so controlling, demanding, creepy, and downright insecure?
(Dictates your fate, asks tithes, tells people to commit atrocious crimes against women/children, and wants constant worship so people don't see the flaws he supposedly doesn't have)
What makes you think so? And what flaws? He survived centuries without correct worship until the arrival of Jesus. And he doesn't dictate our fate. We decide for ourselves. Such as in the Garden of Eden. Did God say,"And Adam shall eat of the tree I specifically said not to eat from"?
Quote from: Bugfartboy on November 12, 2010, 03:36:49 PM
Sorry. The way you just left it on it's own suggested that you care nothing for human life. We are worth more than blue-green foamy pond scum you know.
Well, technically, we are just chemicals. We've got enough iron in us to make a small nail, some carbon (what coal and diamonds are made of) and we're 70% (genetically) similiar to a tree.
Quote from: Genesis 2:7
And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.
I don't doubt that we are mostly carbon. God formed us by hand out of the dust of the earth. He gave man something that the other beasts of the earth didn't have: To made into the likeness of God and have a soul. We were made perfect in originality. But then Adam broke the only rule God had made. He ate of the Tree of the Knowlege of Good and Evil. He sinned. And it's been buried in us ever since.
Wait a sec... sins are hereditary?
Basically, yeah. Adam and Eve represented the entire human race. They were innocent, completely without knowledge of evil. They had one command, and they disobeyed it. If you think it is unfair that all of human kind fell with them, think about it. They were innocent, more innocent than a child at birth. Yet, with the temptation of the devil and each other, they fell. If any other human had been in the same scenario, they would have failed too. Once they ate the fruit of the tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, they, and the entire human race, gained the knowledge of good and evil.
(Edit: I remember now, Adam and Eve did represent the entire human race)
It was put into their genes and passed down from generation to generation until this very day. And Eve had had kids already. That's why it was such a punishment to have pain in childbirth. Sin became our mortal inheritance.
Oh, HECK NO! Don't diss the science of genetics by putting religion into it. Sin is NOT an evolutionary advantage, and would be bred out. Furthermore, your take on the SCIENCE of genetics is that theoretically, one could remove the S-iN gene from an embryo, and you would thus have another non-sinning human, that didn't need to be Christian. I can't believe you would sully the field like that.
Anyway, I thought that the tempting serpent was Lilith, not the devil...
Nope. The devil, who had been cast from heaven. And I had been using the genes as an example.
Sin is not exactly a genetic thing, it's a part of being a human.
Quote from: Duckling on November 14, 2010, 08:02:59 PM
Sin is NOT an evolutionary advantage, and would be bred out.
Not all genetic disadvantages are bred out. Several things come to my mind, like albinism, sickle cell, Huntington's disease, and pretty much every other genetic disease.
No one is actually sure who the serpent was. He may have been possessed by the devil, or maybe he was just a nasty snake. Most Christians believe that it was the devil, for the verses
"And I will put enmity
between you [the serpent] and the woman,
and between your offspring and hers;
he will crush your head;
and you will strike his heel."
from the book of Genesis are often interpreted as Jesus later defeating the devil.
Quote
Anyway, I thought that the tempting serpent was Lilith,
I'm sorry, who's Lilith?
Quote from: yogc elf on November 14, 2010, 08:53:54 PM
Not all genetic disadvantages are bred out. Several things come to my mind, like albinism, sickle cell, Huntington's disease, and pretty much every other genetic disease.
They aren't always bred out, but they usually are. Otherwise we'd all have that type of problem.
I have no clue what Lilith is. I don't think it's in the bible.
I'm fairly sure that the serpent was possessed by the devil. When God created all of the animals, he saw that they were good. So, it wouldn't make sense that a snake, created by God, would tempt Eve. Plus, Jesus defeating the devil does match the verses. Jesus defeated sins/the devils claims on people, hence the "crush your head", but died a painful death (and took the full wrath of God that he had against our sins), hence the "strike his heel."
Edit: Sorry Mike, I didn't see your post. Sickle cell and albinism (and probably Huntington's disease) are caused by recessive genes, so they don't manifest themselves even if they are still in your DNA. So, even if we all had some genes that could cause these problems, we wouldn't all have the problem, since the genes would be inactive. Just because the disease doesn't show doesn't mean it isn't there.
Thank you, Mike. And most genetic diseases maintain their existence by being recessive, and thus carriable, for a few generations, but die out in time. These disease you mentioned are simply among the most common mutations. Sickle-cell is even an advantage of sorts in malaria-infested areas, in that the malaria parasite cannot live inside the "sickle" cells.
I think you missed my edit. By the way, recessive genes are as inheritable as dominant. There is no particular reason that a recessive disease would die out over time just because it never manifested itself. Genes do not have to manifest themselves to exist. Recessive genes would not die out over time any sooner than dominant genes would. If any genes died out over time, it could be either a dominant or recessive, with a 50/50 chance for either one.
I understand how genetics serve as a metaphor for sin, but let's not go too off topic.
Oh, and I'm Christian. My views are that even atheists and agnostics should read the Bible, because most of the lessons taught in it do help lead a better life.
You miss MY point; even a recessive gene, which could hide itself in inheritance and carrying, would manifest itself every once in a while. Specimens carrying the gene would be less likely to have offspring capable of surviving to reproduce, i.e. their offspring are likely to manifest or be carriers if they are. If the gene either manifests, or is not carried, which is likely in the case of a rare mutation, it will either end the genetic passing, or end the life of the organism to which is is passed. And about Lilith:
And the Serpent, the Woman of Harlotry, incited and seduced Eve through the husks of Light which in itself is holiness. And the Serpent seduced Holy Eve, and enough said for him who understands. And all this ruination came about because Adam the first man coupled with Eve while she was [spoiler=obscene]in her menstrual impurity [/spoiler] – this is the filth and the impure seed of the Serpent [spoiler=biblical obscenity]who mounted Eve [/spoiler] before Adam [spoiler=biblical obscenity]mounted her[/spoiler]. Behold, here it is before you: because of the sins of Adam the first man all the things mentioned came into being. For Evil Lilith, when she saw the greatness of his corruption, became strong in her husks, and [spoiler=biblical obscenity]came to Adam against his will, and became hot from him and bore him[/spoiler] many demons and spirits and Lilin. (Patai81:455f)
Hey, I can agree with some of what the Bible says. Just not the part about smiting and raping and murdering and slaying those who are inferior.
Wander Shadow: That's nice. I think some atheist should read the bible since they don't know what it says.
Duckling: If a person carried the disease without it manifesting, the person would not be less likely to have offspring capable of surviving to reproduce, so long as the offspring doesn't manifest the disease. The disease still stays, but it doesn't do anything. Where did you get the part about Lilith? Patai 81:455f is not part of the bible.
I would like to know as well. Sorry for my inactivity. Geometry homework.
I think that the Abrahamic religions are all the same, they all have the same real principles, the only reason for conflict is a handful of idiots.
Judism and Christianity start out the same with the old testament, but Judism doesn't accept the New Testament, which is a lot of what the old testament was pointed to, and what is arguably the most important part of the bible. Islam is the writings of a guy who used some scripture as a basis, then went off in his own direction. While these differences may seem minor, the principles that are different are key principles of the religion.
Yogc is right. Judism doesn't accept the New Testament and Islam goes off of scripture to make a new religion and claim it true. Though I have a question. Isn't funny that most cults through the ages have been started by a person who claim to have seen an "Angel of Light" while Lucifer was supposed to have been the "Angel of Light"? Odd don'tcha think.
Actually if you look, the similarities between the Torah scrolls and the Qu'ran are extremely visible, the problem with your logic is you compare the two with the Bible which has been watered down in translation, while the other two remained in Hebrew and Arabic the Bible has gone from Aramaic to Greek to English, therefore you are not correct in believing that they are all so different.
On another note, how would you like it if I called Jesus Christ some guy, I think we all know the name and role of Mohammad (sulallahu alahi wasalm.)
To someone who isn't a Christian or a Muslim, I don't doubt they look similar. I think the religions, while they have some similarities, have key differences that distinguish themselves. A Muslim wouldn't like to be called a Christian, and a Christian wouldn't like to be called a Muslim. A Christian is not a Muslim; they believe in Christ, who paid for our sins, and absorbed the wrath of God that was righteously directed at us. We believe that believing in Christ and accepting him as lord is the only way to heaven. You will not find a Muslim or a Jew who believes this, unless the Jew has converted to Christianity.
Quote from: The Holy namelesskitty on November 20, 2010, 11:49:46 PM
On another note, how would you like it if I called Jesus Christ some guy, I think we all know the name and role of Mohammad (sulallahu alahi wasalm.)
It happens plenty, assuming people even admit he existed.
Yogc is right. I think I would know if my own religion was Islam. And why are you defending Islam anyway THN? You believe in no religion don't you?
PS If there were a Muslim activly posting here, (s)he would agree in saying that the two are not the same.
But of course they are not the same; it is of saying that clouds cumulous and clouds nimbus are, too.
The point is that they are very similar, and they are both clouds (religions) and people emphasize the differences too much.
If you were supposed to find someone and deliver a package to them, do you think you could get by with giving it to someone similar to the person you are supposed to send it to? Similar is not the same.
You'll note that I am not the one saying they are.
You said they are very similar, and people emphasize the differences too much. The differences are more than enough to cause them to not be the same. They should be emphasized, because the differences happen to be about the most important part of our faith. If you don't emphasize the differences, you will probably end up thinking they are basically the same, but they aren't.
1. Agreed.
2. Agreed. Any are.
3. Maybe. As an atheist, I am ambivalent on this.
4. No. People don't emphasize or advertise the differences between aurium and pyrite, and nobody confuses those for long.
Well, apparently, people confuse Christianity and other Abrahamic religions. I'm guessing it comes from ignoring the differences and focusing on the similarities.
Quote from: The Holy namelesskitty on November 18, 2010, 11:39:23 PM
I think that the Abrahamic religions are all the same, they all have the same real principles, the only reason for conflict is a handful of idiots.
You may note that I am neither Holy, Nameless, or feline. Don't take it up with me.
I'm not. But, you did claim that we don't need emphasize the differences to much, and you inferred that no one would confuse them when you made the statement about aurum and pyrite. However, people do confuse them.
Namely because those are names that are rarely used in the common day. I think I would know if my own religion were Islamic or another Abrahamic religion.
You're Christian right? That's Abrahamic. Besides give me a major difference, make it three.
I never said it wasn't Abrahamic. I just said I would know if it were another.
Differences between Christianity and Judism:
Jews do not believe in Jesus. Christians do.
Jews still believe in the Mosaic law, and believe they are still under it. While Christians respect and to some degree believe it, they realize that Jesus has freed them from the conviction of the law.
Jews do not believe pretty much anything in the New Testament.
I'll do differences between Islam and Christianity latter.
1. They believe he was a prophet, but not the messiah.
2. Reformist Jews actually believe that the law is not and never was absolute, I don't speak for all Jews but many that I do know agree with the previous statement.
3. In what sense? Do you mean the messiah bit or all the rest?
The New Testament is based off the Messiah in it's entirety. They don't believe in any of it I believe.
Exactly. They don't believe anything in the New Testament. So, if you really want to figure out three differences between Judism and Christianity, go to the New Testament, and look for three things that aren't in the Old Testament.
Let's see.
Difference 1:
John 1:14
And the word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory; glory as of the only begotten of the father.
Difference 2:
John 3:16
For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that who so ever believeth in Him shall not perish but have everlasting life.
Difference 3:
Romans 3:21-26
But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, even the righteousness fo God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe. For there is no difference; for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God set forth as a propitation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate his righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, to demonstrate at the present time his righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.
Enough examples for 'ya?
Quotes do not count as examples only evidence.
But examples also count as evidence, so, if quotes are evidence, they can be examples too.
For my dos centavos, I thought that quotes were testimony...
Duckling by your logic:
Fact: fish are animals
Fact: birds are animals
Conclusion: fish are birds.
Heh heh. If you believe everything that scientists say, we are bannanas. Aren't we some 90% genetically similar to them? What does that prove?
Quote from: Bugfartboy on November 24, 2010, 11:22:17 AM
Heh heh. If you believe everything that scientists say, we are bannanas. Aren't we some 90% genetically similar to them? What does that prove?
This is the least intelligent thing I have ever seen on the internet. For the sake of humanity, you had better be kidding
About what. The "studies" I've seen suggest that we are some 90% genetically similar to bananas.
Well, think about it, we both need food, we both take in or take out carbon dioxide/oxygen and we both reproduce. We also both have skin.
In conclusion, so what? Who cares if genetically we are similar to bananas.
And it's NOT 90%. We are 90% genetically identical to... ground squirrels, maybe. But not bananas.
And Holy Nameless, don't pin stupid logic on me. I wasn't the one supporting Duskling's faulty logic. Either you don't read my posts carefully enough, or you used the wrong name.
And what was Duskling's faultly logic? I didn't see him giving any logic. Are YOU using the wrong name perhaps?
Quote from: Duskling on November 24, 2010, 12:24:32 AM
But examples also count as evidence, so, if quotes are evidence, they can be examples too.
I'd hardly confuse another with a similar name for myself. :-\. I really could use a snooty smiley now....
Anyway, what Holy Nameless said.
Yes, my computor autocorrected it to fit a word which is coincidentally a username for another member.
Quote from: Bugfartboy on November 24, 2010, 11:57:38 AM
About what. The "studies" I've seen suggest that we are some 90% genetically similar to bananas.
Proof?
I don't remember where I read it. I just remember I read it somewhere.
Unsupported, you coulda made that up. Give me a link or lose the argument, you can't just say it happened, give me evidence.
I wasn't arguing about it. You people did. And it sprouted into another conversation.
What do bananas have to do with religion?
They are an attack on atheism by means of attack on Darwinian evolution. By saying that they are 90% genetically identical, Buggy hoped to show genetics to be ridiculous, and thus Darwinian evolution, and by extension, atheism.
You know what, this is getting DANGEROUSLY close to flaming. So, how about we all agree that we can't change each other's minds and we will find out who's right when we die. Deal, everyone?
No. And anyway, if people DO start flaming, I can lock this topic.
Quote from: Cypher on November 28, 2010, 05:36:45 AM
No. And anyway, if people DO start flaming, I can lock this topic.
Ok then... but, remember, I warned you.
Quote from: Ersatz Man on November 29, 2010, 01:05:12 PM
Quote from: Cypher on November 28, 2010, 05:36:45 AM
No. And anyway, if people DO start flaming, I can lock this topic.
Ok then... but, remember, I warned you.
Indeed I shall. ;)
Even if we were 90% genetically identical to ground squirrels (or bananas), we would still be very different from them. There is tons of information in genetic code. Missing 10% of the code would be like leaving out a few dictionaries worth of information, at the least.
Isn't the human genome I don't know... Somewhere around a couple hundred?
A couple hundred what?
Exactly. Aren't there supposed to be a couple hundred genomes in the human gene?
There is only one human genome per cell, and most of the genes are turned off in any given cell.
If the human genome were stored as a text file, the file would be about 1.5 gigabytes. If you stored it in raw format for later re-analysis, it would be between 2 and 30 terabytes. 1 terabytes=1000 gigabytes. There is tons of information in the human genome. That means if something is only 90% similar to humans, that means that the text file would contain .35 gigabytes of different information. In raw format, it would contain between 1.8 and 27 terabytes of different information. That's a ton of difference.
If you want to know where I got the first few numbers from, see this site.
http://www.genetic-future.com/2008/06/how-much-data-is-human-genome-it.html (http://www.genetic-future.com/2008/06/how-much-data-is-human-genome-it.html)
Thank you, and we've established a point that was not really part of a consequential argument or debate...
I just think it's funny that some people point to genetic similarity between gorillas and humans and say that we aren't so different genetically.
We aren't. We only (according to a theory based on Darwinian evolution) branched off from their ancestry abt. 6,000,000 years ago. Short time geologically.
Could you please give an example of a common ancestor? I would prefer if it were a mammal, not some bacteria or protist.
As would I. And as to how the current human reproduction system formed: isn't asexual reproduction easier than what is set up now? What would cause an organism to change so that its ability to survive was diminished? With the current system you need two organisms to make another. With asexual reproduction you need only one. Bacteria do it. Why would that change?
Buggy, read a scholarly arcticle; I'm not explaining this one... again.
yogc elf, the species Ardipithecus ramidus kadabba is as close as we've got to a common ancestor with Pan troglodytes. It has many chimp-like characteristics, and wasn't fully bipedal.
Quote from: Bugfartboy on November 30, 2010, 10:04:41 PM
As would I. And as to how the current human reproduction system formed: isn't asexual reproduction easier than what is set up now? What would cause an organism to change so that its ability to survive was diminished? With the current system you need two organisms to make another. With asexual reproduction you need only one. Bacteria do it. Why would that change?
Size is a major deciding factor in the fight for survival, it probably comes right after conscious thought, but then multicellular organisms cannot simply divide, therefore developed the need for sexual reproduction.
But how would that cell know that size is better for survival? Look at the ameba. When will it decide that it's time to grow? And another thing, how did the same species end up on different sides of the world? Don't tell me. The chimp de-evolved into a bird, flew to an island, and then re-evolved into a chimp. Is that what you imply?
No. It's called migration. Remember how it took millions of years to evolve into a human from an ape-like ancestor? It only takes thousands to move it all over. And in most places, the species are not the same. In Australia, you have marsupials, and the only marsupial here is the opossum.
What do you mean know it? Usually it starts out with a parasite then the parasite and the host form a mutual relationship between parasite and host, eventually connecting more and becoming more specialized, eventually those cells cannot live without each other and eventually join genetic codes thus creating a multicellular organism. No knowledge required.
Quote from: Bugfartboy on December 01, 2010, 09:43:26 PM
But how would that cell know that size is better for survival? Look at the ameba. When will it decide that it's time to grow? And another thing, how did the same species end up on different sides of the world? Don't tell me. The chimp de-evolved into a bird, flew to an island, and then re-evolved into a chimp. Is that what you imply?
There's also the fact that the lands are breaking apart and moving. (It used to be all one land called Pangea and, yes, this HAS been proven by fossils being at the east edge of one country and the west edge of another even though there's about 1000 miles of sea between them.)
Quote from: Duckling on December 01, 2010, 06:24:46 PM
yogc elf, the species Ardipithecus ramidus kadabba is as close as we've got to a common ancestor with Pan troglodytes. It has many chimp-like characteristics, and wasn't fully bipedal.
How exactly do scientist determine that a species is an ancestor to humans? By looks? Guessing? Similar bone structure?
Measurements of homologous structures, and comparison determines order of ancestry. Location of find and theorized migration patterns may determine age, and carbon-dating finds the age accurate to within a hundred years or so.
If I remember correctly from my World Geography class, doesn't the object bing carbon dated need to be at least 600 years old?
No. 600 years easy, 150 years if you've got good equipment, which the people doing radioactive carbon dating have.
And I'm saying accurate to within 100 years, out of millions.
Alright. Answer me this. Have you found a fish person or a tapeworm person?
No, why? And may I ask if this pertains to Darwinism? Because nothing in his theory would suggest that.
We (scientists) have found a creature that is mostly like a fish; however, it has appendage-like nubs. The Uranium-dating process tells us that it was alive at around the right time to have been the evolutionary "missing link" between fishes and amphibians.
Do you have a source?
Quote from: Duckling on December 07, 2010, 03:06:34 PM
Measurements of homologous structures, and comparison determines order of ancestry. Location of find and theorized migration patterns may determine age, and carbon-dating finds the age accurate to within a hundred years or so.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but to determine homologous structures, you basically look at the structure and see if it looks alike. And to carbon date a fossil, doesn't it need to be found in igneous rock?
No! It does not need to be in igneous. It can be in sedimentary rock, and usually is.
Yes, you determine homologous structures by looking at similar fossils from times nearby, of similar species.
Yes, I have a source. Try
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts/2905_link.html
All I see is text. Where is the visual proof? For all the rest of us know, you could have been making up the story.
Quote from: Bugfartboy on December 08, 2010, 08:54:34 PM
All I see is text. Where is the visual proof? For all the rest of us know, you could have been making up the story.
That's my attitude towards the Bible.
Ah. That's where you are wrong. I have seen a report, with actual VISUAL proof of Egyptian chariots at the bottom of the Red Sea. And not just the bottom. The middle. Let me see if I can dig up the link again. To be edited... Look Here (http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=19382)
If I understand correctly, scientist use carbon 14 for radioactive dating of fossils under 70,000 years old. After that, they must use volcanic ash to determine what time period the fossils around it. Here's the source.
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/IIE1aAtomicclocks.shtml (http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/IIE1aAtomicclocks.shtml)
Problem 1) If an animal dies in the bottom of a canyon which is eventually covered up, it is not in the appropriate layer. I find it somewhat hard to believe that everything from the same time period would die in the same layer. Sure, they might die beneath certain creatures, but if you are using volcanic ash to date layers, you are bound to run into problems.
Problem 2) Read this site, especially the bit about lava.
http://www.scienceagainstevolution.org/v4i11f.htm (http://www.scienceagainstevolution.org/v4i11f.htm)
By the way, here's you might find interesting.
Icons of Evolution-notes some of the problems in some of the popular icons used by scientist. I don't know how recent it is, but some of the icons are still in my science text book.
There was another one I was thinking about, but I forget the title. I'll see if I can find it.
It's not all in the same exact layer. The creatures are only within the same layer within one stratum of rock, and that is usually enough. While it is true that certain areas have layers containing the same fossils at different altitudes than one another, scientists use easy-to-find index fossils to date other fossils found in rock layers.
Igneous rock is not all hardened ash; that would be mineral deposits. Igneous rock is literally "rock of fire", referring to its fiery origins -- lava.
I'll admit that radioactive dating with uranium is slightly dodgy at times, but that's not to say that it's completely inaccurate, and that everything determined with it is inaccurate. For the most part, findings stand up. So what if the fish-amphibian came 10 million years sooner or later?
And what other scientific theory is there that has as much sheer evidence and reason behind it as evolution?
And nothing to say to me? I will take that as a surrender on your part.
The part about igneous rock was not referring to volcanic ash, it was just to show problems with radioactive dating. My fault for not being clear.
The fish amphibian is probably a coelacanth, possible an extinct one. They have little nubs that could be mistaken for developing feet. Due to genetic diversity inside the species, it wouldn't be too hard to label a creature a different species with nothing but a fossil to go with. I think scientist are a little too eager to point at a species and shout "Missing link!" I believe platypus have been called the missing link before. Why don't scientist call lungfish the missing link between amphibians and fish?
Read Icons of Evolution. Find the DVD Unlocking the Mystery of Life.
Buggy, that's not a surrender. I just wasn't interested enough in Egyptian chariots at the bottom of the sea to check back for a link when I wasn't even sure one was going to show.
I will edit this post with my response. I have to go decorate a fir for when I celebrate solstice. Not Christmas.
Alright Ducky. You know what the axiom of all biology is right? Biogenesis. In short it states that life only comes from life. Not from nonliving matter. I'd like you to answer that before I ask my next question.
No. That is the second part of one theory, predominant at the moment, called Cell Theory. Not all biology is based on cell theory, but as it is accepted at the moment, it would take a lot to shake down the theory, and much is based on it.
And while of course the first cell couldn't have come from a living cell, there are exceptions.
And by the way, how I finish answering the question will be determined by exactly what you plan to prove by this.
Alright. What are those exceptions then? My other question can wait.
Like the first cell. That's one exception. By its very definition. Unless, of course, you'd be willing to consider the possibility of the universe always having been here, and not being merely 5 or 6 thousand years old. Then there might not have been a first cell.
Just out of curiosity, and since this thread is the "What's your religion?" thread, I would like to know how much you or anyone else actually knows about Christianity. You could give me a summary of what you know about it if you don't mind.
That's funny. I have no interest in spewing facts. Thanks, but I'll pass.
Quote from: cyso on February 05, 2011, 02:04:38 PM
Just out of curiosity, and since this thread is the "What's your religion?" thread, I would like to know how much you or anyone else actually knows about Christianity. You could give me a summary of what you know about it if you don't mind.
Is that a challenge?
I think he just did. I really don't know what I'm saying. I didn't get your question.
Quote from: Duskling on February 05, 2011, 10:40:11 PM
Quote from: cyso on February 05, 2011, 02:04:38 PM
Just out of curiosity, and since this thread is the "What's your religion?" thread, I would like to know how much you or anyone else actually knows about Christianity. You could give me a summary of what you know about it if you don't mind.
Is that a challenge?
No, I just want to know how much you know.
Quote from: cyso on February 06, 2011, 02:49:51 PM
Quote from: Duskling on February 05, 2011, 10:40:11 PM
Quote from: cyso on February 05, 2011, 02:04:38 PM
Just out of curiosity, and since this thread is the "What's your religion?" thread, I would like to know how much you or anyone else actually knows about Christianity. You could give me a summary of what you know about it if you don't mind.
Is that a challenge?
No, I just want to know how much you know.
Alright, thanks, because it sounded like you were going to go im2smart4u on us, teaching us something while being brutally smart and honest.
I'm going to avoid brutality. Honestly, I don't expect you to be a theologian or anything, so I'm not looking for some excerpt from a textbook.
Remember anything from our conversations Duskie-Poo?
Well... one thing I know for sure about Christianity is God supposedly created everything in the universe, even the universe itself, then had a son named Jesus, who then died for our sins. Much more than that is pretty much a mystery to me, I might know more, I just can't remember, so, I might pop in during these conversations offering what knowledge I know, but it's probably just common knowledge.
Did you know he didn't stay dead? Put into a hole in the ground and the hole was covered by a giant rock. Three days later, three ladies go up to his grave to annoint his corpse with oils and perfumes and see something. The rock was rolled away. They go in, no ones there. Only the strips of cloth he was wrapped in. They run into town to find his disciples and they go up and look. He's not there. Only the strips of cloth. Then, Mary Magdalene was cryin in the garden where Jesus had been laid and suddenly, Jesus appeared to her. Alive and well. And he hadn't just been killed. He had been beaten and tortured by other methods, forced to carry his own cross, and stripped and his clothes divided up among the guards by gambling. That's a lot for someone to go through.
Quote from: Fyer on February 06, 2011, 03:16:31 PM
Did you know he didn't stay dead? Put into a hole in the ground and the hole was covered by a giant rock. Three days later, three ladies go up to his grave to annoint his corpse with oils and perfumes and see something. The rock was rolled away. They go in, no ones there. Only the strips of cloth he was wrapped in.
This part I knew.
Quote from: Fyer on February 06, 2011, 03:16:31 PM
And he hadn't just been killed. He had been beaten and tortured by other methods, forced to carry his own cross, and stripped and his clothes divided up among the guards by gambling.
This part, I also knew, the rest, not really.
Quote from: Duskling on February 06, 2011, 03:04:55 PM
Well... one thing I know for sure about Christianity is God supposedly created everything in the universe, even the universe itself, then had a son named Jesus, who then died for our sins. Much more than that is pretty much a mystery to me, I might know more, I just can't remember, so, I might pop in during these conversations offering what knowledge I know, but it's probably just common knowledge.
You got the gist of it. Do you know why Jesus died for our sins?
Not really, sorry.
Well, the idea goes something like this. God created all things perfect/sinless originally. However, they still sinned. God couldn't let the sin go by, just like a just judge couldn't just let a bank robber free to do whatever they wanted without enforcing the law and still be called just (assuming the person is definitely a bank robber). The law condemns us. But, God still loves his creation. So, as stated in John 3:16
For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that whosoever believes in should not perish but have eternal life.
Jesus was sent to save us by taking our punishment, and paying our debt. It would be like Person A who owed Person B some money and couldn't pay it back. Person B lets Person A go and just takes the loss of money. Not a very good scenario, sorry. Anyways, the punishment that was originally ours was put on Jesus. This is what the Bible has to say about it in 2 Corinthians 5:21
God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.
Jesus takes our sins, and we get off. God no longer sees our sins.
I think I did a terrible job explaining, sorry. I hope I don't just confuse you more.
EDIT: Wow. No one else posted before I did.
I think you did okay. You left out that Jesus was not just the son of God but rather God himself.
I guess I should have mentioned that. I think (correct me if I'm wrong or just totally crazy) that the term son of God was used to describe Jesus because his earthly body was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit (God).
Yep. He was the son of man and the son of God.
If God is male, and Jesus is the son of man and God, why does the Bible hate on homosexuals?
Poor poor Ducky. Man as in mankind. You knew that. You just felt like being literal.
Why pity the literal?
Why does the bible have such silly portions? Like, Leviticus 18:22, saying that homosexuality is an "abomination"?
I have a question for you. What if everyone on earth decides to either commit suicide or go homo. How long would the human race last?
Quote from: Fyer on February 07, 2011, 05:51:20 PM
I have a question for you. What if everyone on earth decides to either commit suicide or go homo. How long would the human race last?
So... homosexuals deserve to die or be shunned because hypothetically they will cause the end of the world? I find it highly unlikely that everyone in the world would decide to commit suicide or become gay.
The bible was written with much the same purpose as other religions- to explain the world, and provide a basic standard for living. In the day and age of the bible, humans struggled to survive, and if people chose not to reproduce, then tribes or families could easily die out. However, in this day and age, this is no longer the case, and I am disgusted that the Bible has not been updated to match this change.
So your disgusted that the bible, or in this case God, refuses to contradict Himself? That's sorta messed up. Because then he'd be contradicting:
Quote from: Hebrews 13:8
Jesus Christ isthe same yesterday, today, and forever.
And Duskie, I meant as a scenario. I was actually expecting someone to respond "Not everyone should do that. Then we'd all die out."
Quote from: Fyer on February 07, 2011, 08:25:14 PM
And Duskie, I meant as a scenario. I was actually expecting someone to respond "Not everyone should do that. Then we'd all die out."
I know, I just think it is wrong to suppress the power of choice just because of one hypothetical scenario.
I am disgusted that Christianity refuses to admit that the Bibles view of homosexuality have been kept the same since the Bible was written. Just because it was said that the Bible should not be changed, means nothing. Its horrible the way gays are treated in society, and Christianity has a share of the blame for this.
Quote from: Duskling on February 07, 2011, 09:11:13 PM
Quote from: Fyer on February 07, 2011, 08:25:14 PM
And Duskie, I meant as a scenario. I was actually expecting someone to respond "Not everyone should do that. Then we'd all die out."
I know, I just think it is wrong to suppress the power of choice just because of one hypothetical scenario.
The power of choice? The law will always suppress your power of choice, less you do something incredibility wrong, like kill somebody.
Quote from: MikeW781 on February 07, 2011, 09:11:36 PM
I am disgusted that Christianity refuses to admit that the Bibles view of homosexuality have been kept the same since the Bible was written. Just because it was said that the Bible should not be changed, means nothing. Its horrible the way gays are treated in society, and Christianity has a share of the blame for this.
Okay. I'm a Christian, and I admit without any hesitation that the Bible's view on homosexuality hasn't changed since the Bible was written. That being said, the Bible doesn't say much more about homosexuality other than it's wrong. It says a lot of things are wrong. Homosexuality just ends up getting picked on for some sort of reason.
It doesn't just say it's wrong. *begins humming to self to the tune of "Are you sleeping"*
Revalations, Revelations,
Twenty-One Eight, Twenty-One Eight.
Sinners go to Hell! Sinners go to Hell!
BURN BURN BURN!
BURN BURN BURN!
Quote from: Revalation 21:8
But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—they will be consigned to the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death."
Quote from: cyso on February 07, 2011, 10:00:06 PM
The power of choice? The law will always suppress your power of choice, less you do something incredibility wrong, like kill somebody.
While that may be true, the law only doesn't allow gay people to marry, with the bible it is as if God doesn't want gay people to exist.
If God so choose, he could reach down and take away all choice on such a matter. But that would be similar with Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden. He wants us to choose to follow him. Why make us, the only of his creations to have been hand sculpted, made in the image of God almighty Himself, and given the breath of life from God, to love him? Would that really be love?
So then why keep us in the first place? If God loves us so much, why does He keep us around if so many people don't believe in Him, and go against the Commandments. So, it's either we go to Hell or He revokes our power to choose, which one is it? Why not let us be unique, why not let us actually be people? So, if He made us, why take away one of the few things that distinguishes us from animals?
Dusk:
If you read the Bible, you may get the feeling that it doesn't want a lot of things to exist such as murders, the sexually immoral (this category isn't limited to homosexuality), those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars. Basically, it doesn't want any sin to exist. Note that if/when you do sin, it's not as if you are a lost cause beyond saving. Here's a few verses from 1 Corinthians.
Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. 1 Corinthians 6:9-11, emphasis mine.
Grr! Why can I not post before 3 other people do!
Dusk: So we go to Hell or He revokes our power to choose?
No, as Christians, we still have the power to choose, and we still are people.
1. If sin doesn't exist, there would be no balance, meaning no order, meaning the world will fall into chaos, but, without order, chaos cannot exist, so either a paradox will open, or the entire universe will be destroyed.
2. Fair enough, if I understand correctly, you are saying that God "washed" us, meaning... saved us from sin, right? Because He saved us from sin, He doesn't want us to fall back? Again, though, sin cannot be annihilated, as hard as anyone will try, as that will disturb a balance.
I think that many people see Christianity as conformism. Would you slaughter the whole litter of pups just because most of them misbehave? Would you lock them up in too small cages while loving them more than a parent loves it's child? God sees us as unique individuals that there will never be two of. And Duskie, if he was going to take away free will, I think he would have done it centuries ago. The US has strayed farther away from it's Christian founders and look where it's gotten us. Submersed in debt, death rates higher than ever, the unborn being murdered, and corrupted government that will do anything to get into office. Back when this country was truly under GOD ALMIGHTY(!), it flourished. We prospered. And we grew too big for our britches as my grandfather would say. We thought we didn't need GOD ALMIGHTY(!) and we fell apart. So if God were planning on killing us or taking away choice, he would have done it a loooooooonnnggg time ago.
Gah. I typed all that up and was beaten by Cyso and Duskie. And there can be order without chaos. Just look at the world in the beginning. Did the earth split in two? Nope. And man was created in the very image of GOD ALMIGHTY(!) and was perfect as thus in the beginning.
Quote from: Duskling on February 07, 2011, 10:26:19 PM
1. If sin doesn't exist, there would be no balance, meaning no order, meaning the world will fall into chaos, but, without order, chaos cannot exist, so either a paradox will open, or the entire universe will be destroyed.
2. Fair enough, if I understand correctly, you are saying that God "washed" us, meaning... saved us from sin, right? Because he saved us from sin, he doesn't want us to fall back? Again, though, sin cannot be annihilated, as hard as anyone will try, as that will disturb a balance.
1. Since when did I say sin didn't exist? Sin is like darkness. Darkness isn't a thing, it is a lack of light. If the world was nothing but light, there would be no darkness. Sin, moral darkness, is caused by a lack of moral light. There was a time when there was no sin, just God's will and God's law. But, by its nature, the law could be broken, which would be sin. I'm not quite sure where you got the thing about balance.
2.
We can't annihilate sins. Jesus absorbed and took our sins on himself.
Fyer, you just beat me with your last post.
Yay!!! I win!!! But yeah. What do you get when you turn off the light? Darkness. And Jesus, the only man to live a completely perfect life, died to absorb our sins and returned from Hell with the key to it so that all who truly believe and accept the offer to be brought under his payment of perfect blood may be free from the darkness that is sin. And that doesn't make us conformists. A true Christian is like someone who has bought health insurance. He's covered. But does that mean that he's going to start throwing himself under trains and busses? And in response to Ducky's statement a couple months ago, the major differences between buddism and Christianity is this: did budda live perfectly and die perfectly to live again three days later? Nope. He's still dead. Was budda the son of GOD ALMIGHTY(!)? Nope. Do buddist monks really care about each other if each is "to be an island unto himself"?
Quote from: Fyer on February 07, 2011, 10:46:25 PM
And in response to Ducky's statement a couple months ago, the major differences between buddism and Christianity is this: did budda live perfectly and die perfectly to live again three days later? Nope. He's still dead. Was budda the son of GOD ALMIGHTY(!)? Nope. Do buddist monks really care about each other if each is "to be an island unto himself"?
Please tell me that I'm interpreting this wrong and that Ducky didn't actually say Buddhism was like Christianity.
But, for some more differences between Buddhism and Christianity, just in case anyone wants to know:
Buddhism: You work to achieve Nirvana
Christianity: You can't work enough to somehow nullify your sins and make them not exist. You can't work your way to heaven. You need Jesus.
Buddhism: There is a cycle of suffering and rebirth. You achieve Nirvana and escape that cycle.
Christianity: You don't get reincarnated. When you're dead, you are dead until God judges the world.
More elaboration on that last point of Christianity: judging doesn't mean everyone is damned. It's merely the separation of those who have been reborn though Jesus into God's family and those who pretty much did anything but. No middle ground there.
I probably should have pointed that out.
Quote from: Revalation 21:8
But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—they will be consigned to the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death."
The quote from Revelations may at first seem as if everyone is screwed and everyone will suffer the second death. But, if you look at the quote from 1 Corinthians, you may notice that Paul says "And that is what some of you were." When we become Christians, our sins are taken by Jesus, and we are forgiven. God doesn't hold them against us. So, even if you lied a thousand times, when God forgives you, he doesn't consider you a liar, so you aren't consigned to the fiery lake of burning sulfur.
Wait. What happens when God supposedly judges the world?
Quote from: Revalation 21:8
But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—they will be consigned to the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death."
This speaks of the judgement of mankind.
The unbelievers are consigned to the fiery lake, the believers spend eternity with God. Here's the verses.
Revelation 21:1-4
Then I saw "a new heaven and a new earth," for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. 2 I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband. 3 And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, "Look! God's dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. 4 'He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away."
I thought that already happened when people died...
Not necessarily duckling. They go to hell, pretty bad there I hear.
Anyways, I hear a lot of talk about how there is no proof and I won't sit here and tell you that everything is proof of god. But, I don't think there would be much test of faith if just outright proved his existence. People would follow him not because they are faithful, but because if they don't they go to hell. And from then he would just be a dictator.
Also, they have proved with cosmology that at one point the universe came from nothingness, that it is ever expanding and was not just 'there'
Big Bang theory is just that, a theory. And although it makes sense, there is nothing to prove this happened.
And DeagonX stated what had been ignored when I said it: the universe has a proven creation point. It hasn't always been here.
Only one thing troubles me about this "God made the world" thing... Where did god come from? I'm an atheist, so I don't know. Please tell me.
God is above the world. That's why, in beginning, the only way man could talk to him was to be spiritually perfect. Once we botched that... Well, look back into the previous pages and you'll find it. But God is outside time and space. He's outside our existence. He had no beginning and has no end. The "Alpha and Omega"(rough quote from Revalations 22:13)
Kay. It's kinda sad that none of my christian friends could answer this.
Quote from: Kaseke on February 13, 2011, 08:35:51 AM
Kay. It's kinda sad that none of my christian friends could answer this.
True, the majority of my Christian friends seem to have done what most of us do with the terms and conditions on iTunes, and just checked the accept box without so much as opening the document they agreed to.
Despite my difference in views to the Christian advocates in this thread, I respect the knowledge of the subject they posses. Just taking a slightly OT post to point that out.
Despite being an athiest, I find religion is a fascinating thing, if misguided.
I am agnostic, but, I too, find religion fascinating.
Thought this was a good place to share this quote:
'Religion is about turning untested belief into unshakeable truth through the power of institutions and the passage of time.
Richard Dawkins (1941 - ), "The Root of All Evil", Channel 4 UK, 2006"
A very true statement.
The main problem with religion is that it offers answers that simply beg more questions, then answers with a request for 'faith'. Science may give more questions than answers, but at least it is honest and says: 'We're working on it, but right now we don't have a clue'.
I guess by that, you mean that Christianity doesn't answer every single little question that you have about it (or maybe we can't answer every question about Christianity). But, from my point a view, a large amount of the reason Christianity requires faith is that it is about an infinite God. We aren't exactly infinite, and we really don't understand infinity, so we don't always completely understand God.
If you want something along the lines of proof for Christianity, look for the effects God has had on the world, or perhaps some of the Old Testament prophesies that ended up coming true.
Here's a prediction of the next response:
Yeah but if someone says something, it's bound to happen eventually. Look at Noestradamous (think I spelled that right). He said a bunch of stuff and he was almost always right. How did that happen.
That's just a predicition.
Quote from: cyso on February 17, 2011, 12:06:57 AM
I guess by that, you mean that Christianity doesn't answer every single little question that you have about it (or maybe we can't answer every question about Christianity). But, from my point a view, a large amount of the reason Christianity requires faith is that it is about an infinite God. We aren't exactly infinite, and we really don't understand infinity, so we don't always completely understand God.
If you want something along the lines of proof for Christianity, look for the effects God has had on the world, or perhaps some of the Old Testament prophesies that ended up coming true.
Old Testament isn't proof for CHRISTIANITY, but actually for what the jews believe in. Christianity is based on the New Testament, which is basically about a man who did "wonders" If someone did that kind of things nowdays, you wouldn't believe it without proof, and would have people investigate such things. So basically you beleive that a man that was born approximately 2011 years ago, and did some kind of magic tricks. In the middle ages "witches" were burned for doing same kind of "wonders". What if they were touched by god too, like Moses was. Also the effects God has had on the world... Do you maybe mean crusades, or Hitler killing Jews? Millions of people were killed because of such things. Also people were able to have slaves for so long, because it was "accepted by god".
No offens to those who are Christian...
I was avoiding this topic, because frankly my religion beliefs are none of your business, but I changed my mind after some asshole in the Gay Marriage topic said religious beliefs are "stupid and ridiculous >:(."
Why are do so many atheist act like assholes? Most people know that it wrong to push religion on people, so there have been very few instinces in my life where people have tired to convert me. On the otherhand, I know dozens of athiest that try to force thier beliefs on people. Instead of expressing their views in a sensible, respectable way, these athiest would rather berate people's religions and portray religous followers as imbeciles. If you don't believe in god, then so be it, but why try to make everyone as cynical as you are? What is so wrong about thinking a higher power will reward one's immortal soul for doing good, while punishing those who do bad? I have never met a bad person who follows their religous beliefs properly, but I know many aithiest who mistreat thier fellow man, because they think they will end up as worm food no matter how they act. (I am not saying that all aithist are bad and all religious people are good, but I do think religion tends to make one a better person.)
Quote from: Duskling on August 23, 2010, 08:04:29 PMI would have to agree with that, seeing as how no religion has any hard evidence of their gods or demons, or of Heaven or Hell. I'm a fairly open-minded person, but until I have some proof of God, Jesus, etc., I will have to say that I don't believe in them.
What about the white light seen by people who have had near death experiences?
Quote from: Bugfartboy on October 31, 2010, 04:44:01 PMThere is no purgatory. It's heaven or hell. No middle ground.
I never understood why protestants, especially baptists, think you are either all good and go to heaven or you are a sinner and go to hell. I perfer the Catholic belief that some sins are worst then others and that you have a chance to repent your minor sins in confession or in purgatory.
Quote from: Duskling on October 31, 2010, 05:43:03 PMI say that Hitler only believed he was a true Christian, and felt that, as such, he had a right to exterminate Jews because of their beliefs.
If you actually read about Hitler's religous views (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_Christianity), then you will see how he warped Christainity into something that has no resemblance to actual Christain beliefs.
Quote from: MikeW781 on November 03, 2010, 06:11:51 PMThe idiocy displayed by those who believe homosexuality will send you to hell continuosly astounds me.
The Catholic Church says it is okay to be homosexual, since it is not a choice, but to engage in homosexual sex would be a sin. Yes, the urge may be natural, but that does not mean you are suppose to give into that urge. You are supposed to ignore sinful urges like premarital sex, homosexuality, and violence.
Quote from: im2smart4u on February 17, 2011, 10:58:37 AM
Why are do so many atheist act like assholes? Most people know that it wrong to push religion on people, so there have been very few instinces in my life where people have tired to convert me. On the otherhand, I know dozens of athiest that try to force thier beliefs on people. Instead of expressing their views in a sensible, respectable way, these athiest would rather berate people's religions and portray religous followers as imbeciles. If you don't believe in god, then so be it, but why try to make everyone as cynical as you are? What is so wrong about thinking a higher power will reward one's immortal soul for doing good, while punishing those who do bad? I have never met a bad person who follows their religous beliefs properly, but I know many aithiest who mistreat thier fellow man, because they think they will end up as worm food no matter how they act. (I am not saying that all aithist are bad and all religious people are good, but I do think religion tends to make one a better person.)
This is an incorrect generalization; the people you talk about are the obnoxious ones, and therefore the ones you know are atheists. If you knew me in real life, you would never hear of my religious beliefs, and would probably assume I am a Catholic like the majority of my community.
Therefore, the only people you know are atheists are the ones who are obnoxious enough to tell you in person their beliefs, so your generalization is based of an incorrect sample. I have no issue debating the topic with people in an online community, but to do so in public is just plain rude.
Quote from: im2smart4u on February 17, 2011, 10:58:37 AM
Quote from: MikeW781 on November 03, 2010, 06:11:51 PMThe idiocy displayed by those who believe homosexuality will send you to hell continuosly astounds me.
The Catholic Church says it is okay to be homosexual, since it is not a choice, but to engage in homosexual sex would be a sin. Yes, the urge may be natural, but that does not mean you are suppose to give into that urge. You are supposed to ignore sinful urges like premarital sex, homosexuality, and violence.
I still disagree with this; I think there is nothing immoral about two gays having sex, and I think its offensive that you put it on par with premarital sex and violence, which are immoral acts.
As a side note, the correct spellings are
ath
eist
relig
ious
relig
ion
Other spelling mistakes aren't as important, but those severely limit one's ability to convincingly convey ideas on the topic at hand, and they are far to numerous in this thread.
And finally, an issue that I am also a part of:
Quote from: CraigStern on January 24, 2011, 09:27:19 PM
Attention: I do not want to see the words "dumb" or "ass" used to describe another member on these forums. It's rude, it undermines your ability to make a persuasive argument, and it violates the rules.
I'm not going to post about this again. The next time I see flaming like this, I'm handing out individual warnings, then bans.
@im2smart4u On the issue of sin, you think that partial sin should be good enough to stand in the presence of God? Sin is sin. It's His perfection and our imperfection that separates us from Him. It's the blots on our spiritual white robes.
To put things in perspective, I am an agnostic from a Catholic family. I rarely go to church, but I do read the bible on occasion. I do keep tracks on the pope (Pope John Paul was better then the new guy). I view the bible in more of a philosophical way, then a religious way. To me, the old testament seems more of a set of tales met to teach moral lessons, then an actual historical account. America was built on the beilef of religious tolerance, but a new generation of narrow-minded athiest are threatening that coexistence by attacking people's religious beliefs (and Christmas). If someone wants to better themselves through religion, what gives me or anyone else the right to object? Any other questions about my beliefs?
Quote from: MikeW781 on February 17, 2011, 04:01:40 PMThis is an incorrect generalization; the people you talk about are the obnoxious ones, and therefore the ones you know are atheists. If you knew me in real life, you would never hear of my religious beliefs, and would probably assume I am a Catholic like the majority of my community.
Therefore, the only people you know are atheists are the ones who are obnoxious enough to tell you in person their beliefs, so your generalization is based of an incorrect sample. I have no issue debating the topic with people in an online community, but to do so in public is just plain rude.
I never said that all atheist are obnoxious (infact I said "I am not saying that all atheist are bad") and I never said that all the atheist that I know are obnoxious (infact I am friends with both obnoxious and non-obnoxious atheist). I am just curious to why snobbishness and arrogance are so prevalent among athiest. How does believing that one will become worm-food after death make someone feel superior? How would you characterize a person who would create an entire topic to ask about people's religions, so they can point out flaws in their logic? How would you characterize a person who crudely insult someone eles' religion?
Quote from: MikeW781 on February 17, 2011, 04:01:40 PMQuote from: im2smart4u on February 17, 2011, 10:58:37 AMQuote from: MikeW781 on November 03, 2010, 06:11:51 PMThe idiocy displayed by those who believe homosexuality will send you to hell continuosly astounds me.
The Catholic Church says it is okay to be homosexual, since it is not a choice, but to engage in homosexual sex would be a sin. Yes, the urge may be natural, but that does not mean you are suppose to give into that urge. You are supposed to ignore sinful urges like premarital sex, homosexuality, and violence.
I still disagree with this; I think there is nothing immoral about two gays having sex, and I think its offensive that you put it on par with premarital sex and violence, which are immoral acts.
Well that is the common view amount millions of Catholics. If you don't believe that, then I don't think Catholicism is for you. Catholics believe that sex is for the purpose of creating a family, so that would make homosexuality as sinful as premarital sex.
Quote from: Bugfartboy on February 17, 2011, 04:15:13 PM@im2smart4u On the issue of sin, you think that partial sin should be good enough to stand in the presence of God? Sin is sin. It's His perfection and our imperfection that separates us from Him. It's the blots on our spiritual white robes.
So a child that steals a candy bar should go to hell alongside the homicidal rapist, since all sins are equal and unforgivable.
Quote from: im2smart4u on February 17, 2011, 10:23:49 PM
Quote from: MikeW781 on February 17, 2011, 04:01:40 PMThis is an incorrect generalization; the people you talk about are the obnoxious ones, and therefore the ones you know are atheists. If you knew me in real life, you would never hear of my religious beliefs, and would probably assume I am a Catholic like the majority of my community.
Therefore, the only people you know are atheists are the ones who are obnoxious enough to tell you in person their beliefs, so your generalization is based of an incorrect sample. I have no issue debating the topic with people in an online community, but to do so in public is just plain rude.
I never said that all atheist are obnoxious (infact I said "I am not saying that all atheist are bad") and I never said that all the atheist that I know are obnoxious (infact I am friends with both obnoxious and non-obnoxious atheist). I am just curious to why snobbishness and arrogance are so prevalent among athiest. How does believing that one will become worm-food after death make someone feel superior? How would you characterize a person who would create an entire topic to ask about people's religions, so they can point out flaws in their logic? How would you characterize a person who crudely insult someone eles' religion?
My point was that arrogance and snobbishness are
not more prevalent among atheists, as there are more than likely dozens of atheists you have met, but just never talked about religion with. Therefore, your data is missing a number of polite atheists who understand they should not discuss religion and are not at all snobbish. Being an atheist, I am not happy with that stereotype, and wish some of my fellow atheists knew to keep their mouths shut to avoid giving the rest of us a bad name.
As a clumsy analogy, it would be like if you presented the idea that homosexuals tended to be flamboyant in their sexuality, as even though you knew gays that were both flamboyant and not, you had seen many flamboyant ones. This would be untrue, as the vast majority of gays just keep relatively quite about their sexuality to avoid harassment and because they feel no need to wave their beliefs in another's face.
Quote from: Kaseke on February 17, 2011, 09:59:10 AM
Quote from: cyso on February 17, 2011, 12:06:57 AM
I guess by that, you mean that Christianity doesn't answer every single little question that you have about it (or maybe we can't answer every question about Christianity). But, from my point a view, a large amount of the reason Christianity requires faith is that it is about an infinite God. We aren't exactly infinite, and we really don't understand infinity, so we don't always completely understand God.
If you want something along the lines of proof for Christianity, look for the effects God has had on the world, or perhaps some of the Old Testament prophesies that ended up coming true.
Old Testament isn't proof for CHRISTIANITY, but actually for what the jews believe in. Christianity is based on the New Testament, which is basically about a man who did "wonders" If someone did that kind of things nowdays, you wouldn't believe it without proof, and would have people investigate such things. So basically you beleive that a man that was born approximately 2011 years ago, and did some kind of magic tricks. In the middle ages "witches" were burned for doing same kind of "wonders". What if they were touched by god too, like Moses was. Also the effects God has had on the world... Do you maybe mean crusades, or Hitler killing Jews? Millions of people were killed because of such things. Also people were able to have slaves for so long, because it was "accepted by god".
No offens to those who are Christian...
Note quite. The witches were accused of being so ignorantly, because there is no mention of witchcraft in the bible and still they considered it a holy crusade. And most little things could be considered witchcraft.
Jesus actually DID things, walking on water, turning said water into wine. (No not really that was just a pun)
Miraculous things. There is a reason he was a savior, yet our paranoid nature turned most against him. He was crucified.
Actually, if you'd read into it at all DeagonX, there are mentions of witchcraft. I'll look more into it but in essence, witchcraft was using unholy processes to do unholy things. One such is demon summoning that, believe it or not, is very common today. I'll get back to you on that.
Quote from: Deagonx on February 17, 2011, 11:07:29 PM
Note quite. The witches were accused of being so ignorantly, because there is no mention of witchcraft in the bible and still they considered it a holy crusade. And most little things could be considered witchcraft.
Exodus 22:18- "suffer not a witch to live"
I think that, as witches don't and never did exist, this is further proof AGAINST literal interpretation of the bible
Then what do you think it meant by using the word "witch"? I'm curious.
Well, honestly I think the bible is very much open for interpretation. A lot like the US Constitution.
I mean, as a christian I could bend the words to fit my needs, but I won't. And those that do well... :/
Quote from: im2smart4u on February 17, 2011, 10:23:49 PM
Quote from: Bugfartboy on February 17, 2011, 04:15:13 PM@im2smart4u On the issue of sin, you think that partial sin should be good enough to stand in the presence of God? Sin is sin. It's His perfection and our imperfection that separates us from Him. It's the blots on our spiritual white robes.
So a child that steals a candy bar should go to hell alongside the homicidal rapist, since all sins are equal and unforgivable.
Stealing a candy bar wouldn't be the only thing sin the child committed. But I think I know what you mean. Why would God punish a relatively moral guy with the same punishment he gave a genocidal maniac? But, by sinning, we are basically turning our back to God, saying that we don't want to and won't do things his way, and that we want to do our own thing apart from him. We tell him basically to leave us alone and that we don't want him to tell us what to do. It doesn't really matter what our sin is; we are still turning our backs on God. So God's punishment for telling him we don't want anything to do with him is giving us what we ask for. He withdraws from us and cuts us off from him. This is hell. Eternally apart from God. Since we are creations of God, being cut off from him is eternal/everlasting death.
Quote from: im2smart4u on February 17, 2011, 10:23:49 PMAmerica was built on the beilef of religious tolerance, but a new generation of narrow-minded athiest are threatening that coexistence by attacking people's religious beliefs (and Christmas).
You might find this study (http://www.asanet.org/press/20060503.cfm) interesting.
Quote from: CraigStern on February 18, 2011, 07:03:21 PMQuote from: im2smart4u on February 17, 2011, 10:23:49 PMAmerica was built on the beilef of religious tolerance, but a new generation of narrow-minded athiest are threatening that coexistence by attacking people's religious beliefs (and Christmas).
You might find this study (http://www.asanet.org/press/20060503.cfm) interesting.
I don't find the study surprising.
A large group of athiest have created mistrust among many Americans by crudely insulting religion, by demanding the word "god" be remove from the Pledge of Allegiance and all US currency, and by aggressively attacking Christmas. Unfortunately, the asshole athiest (including a few who have posted in this topic) draw attention away from the quiet, respectful athiest.
Man, why would you want to get rid of Christmas? That's just dumb. I'd prefer to keep Chirstmas around, and celebrate it as a celebration of light and gift-giving, not a religion I don't think I can trust.
And most of my disrespect and crude insults to religion have nothing to do with my atheism. They're just me not liking the way organized religion takes up part of the day that you could be spending doing something else, and maybe, just maybe, if, as you claim, homophobia is genetic (which I genuinely and sincerely doubt), there's an equal or greater chance that not feeling the need to be part of somthing greater or waste my time just to fit in is genetic, too. Don't hate on me for it, please.
And the past participle of "remove" is "removed". The third person singular present indicative of the verb "to draw" is "draws".
And finally, while one can have a "large group of atheists", there is no such thing as a "large group of athiest", unless you are trying to insist that atheists are uncountable, and one conglomeration of the substance "athiest" can make up a large group.
Please excuse the nit-pick.
Quote from: Duckling on February 18, 2011, 11:08:08 PM
And most of my disrespect and crude insults to religion have nothing to do with my atheism. They're just me not liking the way organized religion takes up part of the day that you could be spending doing something else, and maybe, just maybe, if, as you claim, homophobia is genetic (which I genuinely and sincerely doubt), there's an equal or greater chance that not feeling the need to be part of somthing greater or waste my time just to fit in is genetic, too. Don't hate on me for it, please.
Waste my time? I'm sure you do some of things that are a waste of time, but I don't criticize you for it. So why are you so concerned about me wasting my own time? Does it bother you that I'm not making perfect use of
my time? Sure, religion takes time. But, I get done what I need to get done, and I don't waste a lot of my time doing things that a normal kid would do, partially because of my religion.
And about the fit in part, I could probably fit in better if I weren't a Christian. Where I live, there isn't any repercussion for saying that your not a Christian. You fit in just fine. And if you act like a Christian, you don't fit in just fine.
Which for us is a good thing. It means that we're acting our faith right. So hate us. I could really not care. In fact, I'd actually revel in it. The day Christianity ceases to stand out among a crowd of unrepentant sinners is the day that the world begins to end.
Note I said "or... just to fit in".
I do not waste my time. I spend it. And if religion prevents you from doing things normal kids do, good for you; I wouldn't know what normal kids do to waste their time.
And is it your problem I don't like organized religion? Is it my problem that organized religion exists? These are both equally valid questions, and both are equally unanswerable, so let's drop those.
May I ask in what sort of community live you?
And Bugger, why should I repent? I don't hurt people. I've done nothing in the last 60 days that strays from my moral compass, my community's ethical code, and call me a sinner if you want, but I can call you ignorant, because you don't believe my gospel truth.
Was that clear, or do I need to rephrase that. Sorry, I'm a bit tired, and if that wasn't understandable, just say which part.
Quote from: Duckling on February 18, 2011, 11:36:06 PM
I do not waste my time. I spend it. And if religion prevents you from doing things normal kids do, good for you; I wouldn't know what normal kids do to waste their time.
And Bugger, why should I repent? I don't hurt people. I've done nothing in the last 60 days that strays from my moral compass, my community's ethical code, and call me a sinner if you want, but I can call you ignorant, because you don't believe my gospel truth.
And I'm sure that you've never spent your time on something that wasn't or isn't worth it. I'm sure that you've used 100% of your time with perfect efficiency.
By saying that you aren't a sinner, you are basically saying that you don't do anything morally wrong. That you are morally perfect. Maybe you should ask your friends or your parents if that's true, and if you never do
anything wrong.
No. I may have done some things that go against their moral compass in the evaluation of the actions they would take in the circumstances, but I have not done anything against my moral code in the last 60 days. Not perfect.
Who's to judge whether the time spent was worth it? You? I don't waste my time. Other people (irritatingly) waste my time, but I allow them to because they convince me that they have the authority to waste my time, or that the waste of time isn't, really, or that the expenditure of time at the present will grant me gain in the future. But, yeah. I haven't really wasted my time recently. I'm sorry if this isn't the case with you.
If you are 13, then your time isn't as valuable as you think it is. Maybe you should consider going to church as a form of self reflection. I don't really buy into the whole god thing, but I find it beneficial to take time to reflect on moral issues and ways to improve myself. Church was a good way for me to do that. Instead of being closed-minded, I have visted many different churches and two synagogues.
I thought he was 11. I thought so because in "Train of Thought" I think he called himself "an 11 year old with an education".
I don't think I ever said that.
im2smart4u, I would have to say that I have yet to find a church which does not simply preach to me the wisdom of believing in their god.
I, as an atheist, have a form of self-reflection that works, minus the preaching. Whenever I stray from the moral compass, I think about how it happened, what went wrong, and how it can not happen again.
I think a wise man once said that if you only count your time as valuable when it's in short supply, you can only do great things when you're old.
And seriously, I'd rather do great things at thirteen.
Quote from: Duckling on February 18, 2011, 11:46:57 PM
No. I may have done some things that go against their moral compass in the evaluation of the actions they would take in the circumstances, but I have not done anything against my moral code in the last 60 days. Not perfect.
Who's to judge whether the time spent was worth it? You? I don't waste my time. Other people (irritatingly) waste my time, but I allow them to because they convince me that they have the authority to waste my time, or that the waste of time isn't, really, or that the expenditure of time at the present will grant me gain in the future. But, yeah. I haven't really wasted my time recently. I'm sorry if this isn't the case with you.
So, I can't judge whether or not the time you spent was worth it, but you can judge that the time I spend on religion isn't worth it?
And about your moral compass, I guess mine is just a little bit more strict than yours, so I guess it is very possible to live up to your moral compass without screwing up. But, two things.
First of all, you said in your previous post, Whenever I stray from the moral compass... which means that you have, in fact, strayed from you moral compass and have done some things that are wrong.
Secondly, the definition of sin isn't not following your own moral compass, it's not following God's moral rules.
They're not moral rules. They're laws that were only put in place due to all the times we've screwed things up.
But how can we have screwed up if there were no rules? That's a paradox. Are you referring to the Adam+Eve situation?
Because if you are, I have one thing to say: "What's wrong with eating an apple?"
They did something that God told them specifically not to do.
Yeah, but did he even have a good reason?
Well, seeing as the result of them eating the fruit is the mess we have today...
And, of course, you might ask why God would make the fruit in the first place. To which I can only say, if God never made the tree, then we would have lived without really knowing God. And, I think that when God does something or allows something to happen, he is focusing on the end result. But, I don't know for sure.
The tree was there to give us choice. We could choose to love him and ignore the tree, or we could eat from the tree and turn our backs to God.
But why couldn't we eat from the tree and love Him? God makes little sense to me.
Because you aren't trying to make sense of it. He specifically said not to eat off that one single tree amidst uncountable others. Say that you are a parent, and really love your kid. So much that you give them freedom to do anything. But give them just one rule. Don't use this sandbox. Now imagine that that kid was an adult. And then he knowingly played in the forbidden sandbox. Would your kid really love you if they could do anything they wanted as long as they didn't mess with the sandbox?
Quote from: Duckling on February 19, 2011, 10:23:49 AMim2smart4u, I would have to say that I have yet to find a church which does not simply preach to me the wisdom of believing in their god.
I don't doubt that the
one church you went to when you where 10-years-old spent tons of time preaching about god. They have those type of churches, but I don't care for them either. You should try new things, because most churches now tell present day stories with moral lessons and signs of hope. They will also throw in tales of bible that serve the same purpose.
Quote from: Duckling on February 19, 2011, 10:23:49 AMI, as an atheist, have a form of self-reflection that works, minus the preaching. Whenever I stray from the moral compass, I think about how it happened, what went wrong, and how it can not happen again.
I don't think you current ways of doing things are working very well. I have read some very unempathic comments from you that have been kinda appalling.
Quote from: Duckling on February 19, 2011, 10:23:49 AMI think a wise man once said that if you only count your time as valuable when it's in short supply, you can only do great things when you're old.
And seriously, I'd rather do great things at thirteen.
What are you doing at 13 that is so great that you can't spend a couple of hours on sunday hearing moral lessons? Video games and talking online?
Ducky! This morning during bible study if found a group of scripture that describes you almost to the letter!!!
Quote from: Romans 1:18-32
18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.
21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.
24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.
26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.
28 Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. 29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31 they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. 32 Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.
Just to clarify, you are calling him depraved, wicked, gay and foolish? And saying he deserves to die?
Not only do you break the forum rules, you debase your own teachings by using it in this context.
I said almost. And how did that break the forum rules?
I may have to report this. I may have said some things which I regret having said, but never anything like this.
I don't hate God; I don't think He's real. I don't know God; He hasn't made himself known to me. If God is flawless, why is he so arrogant as to assume the need to be glorified? My thinking is not futile; I try to discover the secrets of mathematics with my thinking. My heart has no quality of foolishness -- my brain would be doing that, but I see more foolishness in those who believe. I could not exchange the glory of God for anything; I never had it. Sexually impure? I think not. Images of birds and reptiles? Don't hate on National Geographic. I would say that created things are in my service, and the day on which this is reversed is the day humanity has stopped. Did I mention that I'm not gay? As for shameful lusts, I'd prefer not to talk about it -- that would be my life, not yours. Don't presume to attach that label to anyone. Only a god could possibly know the inner thoughts of a man or woman. Wickedness? I never cackle, nor beat nor bruise nor break bones, nor punish anyone so brutally with words as you have me. I am not evil; I am good. I am not greedy; I seek gain. I am not depraved; my morals are neither corrupted nor degraded. My morals are my business alone, and they are whole. What is to envy? What do others have that I cannot?
Murder? Strife? Deceit? Malice? None is so malicious, deceitful, so strife-ridden, so murderous as one who would call others as such and have more believe it. That decieves, that maligns, that murders the honesty of a man or woman so thoroughly, so completely that he or she must earn it back with brow-sweat a thousand-fold greater than that which was expended to cause such strife. Hypocrisy knows no bounds when one calls another falsely a slanderer. I may be insolent, but only when I am within my rights to presume, when the one whom I insole has not shown respect to earn mine. I am not arrogant; I am considerate, not only to those that consider me. There are few who are less boastful than me; this is not a boast, but a statement of utmost sincerity. If you think what I do is evil -- the spreading of knowledge -- then I do invent new ways. I have only disobeyed my progenitors when their cause seems silly; only when they insist upon wearing dress socks do I protest. I understand in ways those of faith may shut out their minds from, and I do not hope to understand or fathom the depths of faith. I am not oath-breaker, no slacker; I have fidelity. I love my parents, my friends, mi novia. I have mercy; I have no pity. A man or woman with a life well spent deserves rest as a well-spent day deserves a night's sleep. I appove not of the wicked, the ignorant, the dark-hearted, the greedy, the evil, the merciless, the pitiful, the depraved, the murderous, the deceitful, the malicious, the slandering, the arrogant, or the boastful -- the others I take issue not with -- only when they claim to be what they are not, who they are not, where they are not, why they are not, do I take issue with them. These are not me.
No further comment.
Alright. I'll admit that some of that didn't describe you and I had no intention of causing harm. I was really referring to just a few sentences in the first and last paragraph. Sorry.
Quote from: Bugfartboy on February 20, 2011, 02:09:51 PM
Ducky! This morning during bible study if found a group of scripture that describes you almost to the letter!!!
Quote from: Romans 1:18-32
18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.
21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.
24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.
26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.
28 Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. 29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31 they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. 32 Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.
This passage makes me about a thousand times less likely to ever be able to accept the Bible. Its ridiculous. Any being who punishes people this severely just for not believing in, and worshiping, him, is not deserving of worship.
It's not just that. Read into it a bit.
Quote from: MikeW781 on February 20, 2011, 06:31:02 PM
Quote from: Bugfartboy on February 20, 2011, 02:09:51 PM
Ducky! This morning during bible study if found a group of scripture that describes you almost to the letter!!!
Quote from: Romans 1:18-32
18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.
21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.
24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.
26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.
28 Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. 29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31 they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. 32 Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.
This passage makes me about a thousand times less likely to ever be able to accept the Bible. Its ridiculous. Any being who punishes people this severely just for not believing in, and worshiping, him, is not deserving of worship.
Not only is that being not deserving of worship, but it is also surely not perfect.
If you only meant a few clauses at the beginnning and end, please just quote those ones. Sacrificing continuity is of less consequence than sacrificing your honesty and people's trust in you.
Quote from: MikeW781 on February 20, 2011, 06:31:02 PM
This passage makes me about a thousand times less likely to ever be able to accept the Bible. Its ridiculous. Any being who punishes people this severely just for not believing in, and worshiping, him, is not deserving of worship.
I don't think you understand God. He created everything. He is the king over everything he created. Just like a potter would have dominion over what he makes, God has dominion over what he made. When we turn our backs to him and worship other things, we are committing treason. When he sin, we are telling him that we want to do things our own way. So his punishment is to let us do things our own way, like it says in Romans 1:28
Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done.
Well, I don't worship other things! I should be fine.
Anyway, he should know better than to expect complete and total obeisance from sentient beings with rational thought. Shame on Him!
By worship, I don't mean, bow down in front of an idol and offer sacrifices. It's putting anything in your heart that takes the place of God.
And, about obedience.
He asks for obedience (which is fair, since, after all, he did create us, and he does have dominion over us), but he doesn't expect it.
Romans 3:23 For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.
He's not holding any delusions that we are going to be perfect. That's why he sent Jesus to pay for our sins. So, if we accept Jesus's payment, we are paid for, and he doesn't see our sins on us. In his eyes, we are perfect when Jesus takes our sins.
And, in the beginning, all that was required to be totally obedient was to not eat fruit from one tree.
Ah. According to Christianity, a father or mother has a right to expect obeisance from their son or daughter, right?
Can one sin if one doesn't know what sin is?
I think you can sin without fully realizing what you are doing. For example, when Jesus was dying, he said "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they are doing." They might have known they were killing an innocent man, but they certainly didn't realize they were killing the son of God. But, Jesus still asked God to forgive them. So, yes, you are still held accountable for what you do. In America, ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking it. The same goes for God. Just because you don't know you are breaking the law doesn't mean that you haven't broken the law.
A son or daughter is supposed to respect and obey a father or mother. Whether or not the father or mother actually expects the son or daughter to respect and obey them is up to the father or mother.
Quote from: cyso on February 21, 2011, 10:06:50 PM
I think you can sin without fully realizing what you are doing. For example, when Jesus was dying, he said "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they are doing." They might have known they were killing an innocent man, but they certainly didn't realize they were killing the son of God. But, Jesus still asked God to forgive them.
So then, thinking something is yours because it looks identical to it and taking it is a sin? Killing is a crime and morally wrong altogether, don't get me wrong, but what if a kid sees a lollipop on a counter and just takes it because it looks like nobody wants it? Would that child be a sinner? Would he/she go to Hell because of a mistake?
Bug, there must be a point in human development at which we are not capable of sinning, right?
Alright. Since you addressed me directly, I will respond just this once. It is believed that there is an "Age of Accountability". This age is different for everyone based on how early they learn and comprehend sin from not sin. If you are beneath your special age of accountability, it's thought that you won't be held accountable for that sin in the mind of God.
So, in essence, each person must eateth from their own tree of knowledge of Good and Evil before they can sin, the difference being that on Earth, learning about sin isn't a sin, but all subsequent sins are.
Just so you know, I'm not really going anywhere destructive to the Chirstian faith with this. Just checking, is all.
Quote from: Duskling on February 21, 2011, 10:40:40 PM
Quote from: cyso on February 21, 2011, 10:06:50 PM
I think you can sin without fully realizing what you are doing. For example, when Jesus was dying, he said "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they are doing." They might have known they were killing an innocent man, but they certainly didn't realize they were killing the son of God. But, Jesus still asked God to forgive them.
So then, thinking something is yours because it looks identical to it and taking it is a sin? Killing is a crime and morally wrong altogether, don't get me wrong, but what if a kid sees a lollipop on a counter and just takes it because it looks like nobody wants it? Would that child be a sinner? Would he/she go to Hell because of a mistake?
That isn't exactly what I meant. It's one thing to make an honest mistake. I'm talking about saying or doing something that you really shouldn't be saying or doing, but not realizing then that what you are doing is really a bad thing. Something that doesn't look wrong at first, but if you look at it in hindsight, it's wrong.
And as for the child, they wouldn't go to Hell for taking a lollipop by mistake. But, taking a lollipop probably wouldn't be the thing that would cause someone to go to Hell. Living a life apart or away from God, or doing your own thing and turning your back to God, is what would cause someone to go to Hell. It isn't as much of a certain sin, but a way of life.
And, Ducky, there is a verse somewhere where basically, King David's son dies shortly after birth. (King David was, for the most part, a really good king. In one cases, he is described as a man after God's own heart) David mentions that he will see his son again in heaven. So, before a certain age (though I really don't have a clue just how young that age is) you aren't held accountable.
But you have to be baptized, right?
It's best, and it's a way of showing/telling people you are a Christian. However, you don't have to be baptized to be a Christian or go to heaven. When Jesus was dying on the cross, this little exchange went on between the two other men being crucified next to him.
Luke 23:39-43
One of the criminals who hung there hurled insults at him: "Aren't you the Messiah? Save yourself and us!"
But the other criminal rebuked him. "Don't you fear God," he said, "since you are under the same sentence? We are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong."
Then he said, "Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom."
Jesus answered him, "Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise."
There was no possible way for the criminal to have been able to be baptized. He died shortly later. But, Jesus still says he will be with him in paradise (heaven).
If you had no way of knowing about Christianity, then what happens, if you haven't sinned, and you die? Limbo?
Quote from: Duckling on February 24, 2011, 07:04:18 PM
If you had no way of knowing about Christianity, then what happens, if you haven't sinned, and you die? Limbo?
Romans 3:23
For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.
Quote from: Duckling on February 24, 2011, 07:04:18 PM
If you had no way of knowing about Christianity, then what happens, if you haven't sinned, and you die? Limbo?
Well, our redemption from sin IS him.
If you sin, and then think Oh man I didn't know I was suppose to worship god and all that stuff, simple fact being you shouldn't have been an evil person.
If you were a good person, but unknowing of god, would he let you into heaven? or send you to hell?
We wouldn't know. Its his choice, not ours. I don't need to justify god. There are 'rules' in the bible that I disagree with, but I still follow them because I BELIEVE in him. Its not a choice, I couldn't move to Islam or another religion because I know its not real.
I KNOW christianity is real.
Moral code isn't built in.
I will defend that argument to the death (And beyond, if there is an afterlife).
If somebody did not have a moral code, or had read the bible, and sinned, would they be an evil person? Of course not. As for the whole 'into heaven or hell'; I have been emphatically told by several devout christians that 'Lack of Baptism = Limbo at Best'. Nonetheless, as nobody likes the thought of unfairness, people tend to gloss over this.
Before you think of arguing with the 'lack of moral code' thing, it has been proven that brain disorders can impede the knowledge of right and wrong, and it can be undermined by upbringing. My scenario is perfectly possible.
In addition, don't you think that these people - Muslim, Hindu, etc - KNOW that their own religion is the true one?
Why don't you step back and examine religion with some objectivity? From a neutral standpoint, christianity looks completely absurd. If god is real, he's having a laugh at your expense.
I suggest you all watch the movie Dogma.
Why don't you sum it up in a spoiler? I doubt I'll watch it.
Well, its more of a very offensive movie, primarily insulting Christianity, especially Catholics....
More of a joke suggestion, but Ill find the wiki summary and put it in this post.
The wiki summary completely ignores all the offensively crude parts. I just thought the movie had a humorous, relaxed view on the topic we are so hotly debating, and was slightly relevant.
[spoiler]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogma_%28film%29[/spoiler]
Quote from: Steelfist on February 27, 2011, 07:46:35 AM
Moral code isn't built in.
I will defend that argument to the death (And beyond, if there is an afterlife).
If somebody did not have a moral code, or had read the bible, and sinned, would they be an evil person? Of course not. As for the whole 'into heaven or hell'; I have been emphatically told by several devout christians that 'Lack of Baptism = Limbo at Best'. Nonetheless, as nobody likes the thought of unfairness, people tend to gloss over this.
Before you think of arguing with the 'lack of moral code' thing, it has been proven that brain disorders can impede the knowledge of right and wrong, and it can be undermined by upbringing. My scenario is perfectly possible.
In addition, don't you think that these people - Muslim, Hindu, etc - KNOW that their own religion is the true one?
Why don't you step back and examine religion with some objectivity? From a neutral standpoint, christianity looks completely absurd. If god is real, he's having a laugh at your expense.
Even if you truly did see Christianity from a neutral standpoint, how you evaluated what you saw would not be neutral. But, I'm sure that from a normal human standpoint, a lot of the things we do may seem ridiculous. I'm sure that from my standpoint, a lot of things that are important to you may seem pointless or ridiculous to me. Just because something seems ridiculous to you doesn't mean it is ridiculous.
You don't go to hell for being an evil person. You go to hell for violating and ignoring God's law. And, like I said before, ignorance of the law does not excuse you from the law. You will still get in trouble for breaking a law you don't know exists in America, and the same applies for God. You would have to be perfect to be exempt from God's punishment. We aren't perfect. I'm not quite sure about this, but I think that most people would agree that they don't always do things perfectly right. You may be morally "better" than someone else, but you still screw up, and you still break God's law. You still turn away from God and do your own thing. You still live apart from God.
You may have been told by Christians that no baptism=limbo at best. I don't have a clue where in the Bible they got the idea of limbo. There is no limbo. They may believe that baptism is required to get into heaven, but that idea is not biblical. I'm not glossing it over. Read the verses that I quoted. They're from the Bible. I'm not quite sure how to get a more direct source than that.
Quote from: Steelfist on February 27, 2011, 07:46:35 AM
#1 I have been emphatically told by several devout christians that 'Lack of Baptism = Limbo at Best'. Nonetheless, as nobody likes the thought of unfairness, people tend to gloss over this.
#2 Before you think of arguing with the 'lack of moral code' thing, it has been proven that brain disorders can impede the knowledge of right and wrong, and it can be undermined by upbringing. My scenario is perfectly possible.
#3 In addition, don't you think that these people - Muslim, Hindu, etc - KNOW that their own religion is the true one?
At #1: Question being, IS IT unfairness? I don't think that is for us to decide. Many christians put their interpretations as the word of god. I have my own interpretations, though I don't force them on anyone. If someone is Muslim, so be it. I am not going to punish them for it, that is not my job.
At #2: Well, I think if the person TRULY believes that what they are doing is right, they may be let into Heaven. But once again, I don't know. No one knows, and no one can decide but God.
At #3 I bet they THINK they know. But they would be wrong. :-[
I bet you think you know. I bet everyone thinks they know, except those who are wise enough to realize that you can't possibly know for certain. Most religions have scriptures and a fanbase, and that's all a religion needs. It doesn't need to make sense, and it certainly doesn't need to be able to win out over other religions; instead, a successful religion has parents teaching children the world of their God before they see any other ides, closing them off to other possibilities.
Some kids see through this, and convert. Others simply don't believe in anything, and rely on what they can reasonably know for certainty. Others realize that no one can be sure, and God-or-not has not provided enough evidence. The latter two of the three are me, but please don't attack me or my beliefs and lack thereof at the moment.
Is it wisdom? Or a lack of true faith? I have no doubt in my mind that God is real.
Does it make sense? That is a subjective question.
The last sentence is only a bad thing, if its not christianity :D
And as stated, is it a realization? Your entire point is extremely biased, you speak as if keeping an open mind to other religion is wisdom. Its quite the opposite. It is a lack of faith. If you are entirely faithful to your religion, you aren't a fool, you aren't dumb. That just means your faithful.
Why do people have religion? Why do they just have to find something/one to believe?
You don't seem to grasp the central point here.
You may 'know' that your religion is the only true one, but other people feel exactly the same about their own
Who are you to tell them they are wrong? There is no placefor a zealot in the world, and nor should there be.
I don't care if you hate abortions. I don't care if you despise homosexuals. I don't even care that you misunderstand the bible itself (Which you do)!
If there is a god, his actions throughout the centuries have not earned him my worship, but my emnity. If there is a god, he has allowed his holy teachings to be debased, misused and distorted. If there is a god, he is a murderer - a genocidal maniac who has commited more evil than any demon in the name of a passing fancy!
Why are we supposed to worship him merely for creating us, then proceeding to fill our lives with suffering and pain? If he is real, he is not perfect, but more flawed than any human.
Quote from: Steelfist on March 02, 2011, 11:32:07 AM
You don't seem to grasp the central point here.
You may 'know' that your religion is the only true one, but other people feel exactly the same about their own
Who are you to tell them they are wrong? There is no placefor a zealot in the world, and nor should there be.
I don't care if you hate abortions. I don't care if you despise homosexuals. I don't even care that you misunderstand the bible itself (Which you do)!
If there is a god, his actions throughout the centuries have not earned him my worship, but my emnity. If there is a god, he has allowed his holy teachings to be debased, misused and distorted. If there is a god, he is a murderer - a genocidal maniac who has commited more evil than any demon in the name of a passing fancy!
Why are we supposed to worship him merely for creating us, then proceeding to fill our lives with suffering and pain? If he is real, he is not perfect, but more flawed than any human.
I dont despise homosexuals, I hate abortions though. Do you NOT hate abortions? are you not AGAINST the taking of a life?
I think he allowed his holy teachings to be misinterpretted to fit peoples bad nature, as a test. My life is not full of suffering and pain, though it does include some. He is perfect, he has no flaws. And you being angry at him for all the suffering in the world is a lack of wisdom. Who knows how much suffering he has STOPPED?
And the suffering that there is is of our own doing.
Exactly, you act as if its GODS fault that someone hurts you.
He gave us the means to make a painless world. Humans have distorted it, it is not his job to fix it.
It is our punishment for our uncountable sins we rack up as we live.
What if a man or woman was the most atrocious person to have ever lived, but they didn't care?
What if they thought everything they did was right, and they were a Christian, and they prayed, and they worshipped, and they obeyed the commandments, and they never committed a deadly sin. What then, if they, throughout their whole life, wronged people to the greatest extent, while simply thinking themselves shrewd, or impassive, or oblivious?
What if they never defied their moral compass once, with no sin because they had no concept of good or evil, because they never had been told that the things they did were evil, wrong, atrocious; or maybe they had been told, but their faith blinded them, leading them to believe they were only working in the service of their Lord? No sin. God would have to let him or her in through the pearly gates, and everyone would know him or her, and they would recoil in fear of the awful person they knew in life whom they swore would not follow them into death. And "Heaven" would be as Hell. Fear, chaos, evil, lies would spread through the promised land above, and this merciless scourge without sin would leave hate and loathing where he went.
Now consider the opposite case. A man or woman learns of wrongs and rights, but they a Jew, a Muslim, a Buddhist, a Taoist, a Confucianist, an aborigine with tribal beliefs. They live their life as best they can, and they go to Hell. This is why I don't like the message Christianity tries to get across, and for other reasons, too.
And punctuate your sentences correctly, will you? It's hard to read when you don't.
Hmm. No answer about the genocide thing, I notice.
About abortions.
At the stage an abortion is legally permitted, it is not even truly alive. It's a potential for a life, no more, no less. And if a mother chooses not to accept it, that is their choice. It isn't your business, it isn't your concern and it isn't within your ability to stop.
You say you don't despise homosexuals? You believe them to be abominations, do you not. You said something of that kind when you began the gay marriage topic.
About whether or not it is god's duty to fix things.
Perhaps you are correct, though that was not the point I originally tried to make. Nontheless, many christians are passively waiting for god to do just that - fix things - instead of trying to improve the current situation.
Also, many, many people were killed because they didn't believe in God, adding even more to Steelfist's "genocidal maniac" point. Religion, no matter which, started many of the conflicts in history.
Various Crusades (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades),
French Wars of Religion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Wars_of_Religion),
The Thirty Years' War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty_Years%27_War),
and the Second Sudanese Civil War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Sudanese_Civil_War), to name a few.
Just because someone launches a war in the name of a religion doesn't mean it is religiously justified. I don't think the word "crusade" appears in the Bible.
Quote from: Duckling on March 05, 2011, 01:44:29 PM
What if a man or woman was the most atrocious person to have ever lived, but they didn't care?
What if they thought everything they did was right, and they were a Christian, and they prayed, and they worshipped, and they obeyed the commandments, and they never committed a deadly sin. What then, if they, throughout their whole life, wronged people to the greatest extent, while simply thinking themselves shrewd, or impassive, or oblivious?
What if they never defied their moral compass once, with no sin because they had no concept of good or evil, because they never had been told that the things they did were evil, wrong, atrocious; or maybe they had been told, but their faith blinded them, leading them to believe they were only working in the service of their Lord? No sin. God would have to let him or her in through the pearly gates, and everyone would know him or her, and they would recoil in fear of the awful person they knew in life whom they swore would not follow them into death. And "Heaven" would be as Hell. Fear, chaos, evil, lies would spread through the promised land above, and this merciless scourge without sin would leave hate and loathing where he went.
Now consider the opposite case. A man or woman learns of wrongs and rights, but they a Jew, a Muslim, a Buddhist, a Taoist, a Confucianist, an aborigine with tribal beliefs. They live their life as best they can, and they go to Hell. This is why I don't like the message Christianity tries to get across, and for other reasons, too.
And punctuate your sentences correctly, will you? It's hard to read when you don't.
Okay. I'm going to quote this verse again. Romans 3:23
For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God
You don't get into heaven because you don't sin. If that were the case, no one would get into heaven. Sin isn't violating your moral compass, it is violating God's law and living your life apart from him. It is ignoring God and telling him that you don't want to listen to him. As Christians, we still sin. This is a quote from some Christian (I forgot his name) as best I remember it.
The difference between a Christian and a Non-Christian is not that one has no sins and the other does, but that one takes part with a reconciled God against his sins while the other takes part with his sins against a dreaded God.
When a Christian gets to heaven, their sinful nature is completely erased so there will be no sin.
Quote from: Steelfist on March 02, 2011, 11:32:07 AM
If there is a god, his actions throughout the centuries have not earned him my worship, but my enmity. If there is a god, he has allowed his holy teachings to be debased, misused and distorted. If there is a god, he is a murderer - a genocidal maniac who has committed more evil than any demon in the name of a passing fancy!
Why are we supposed to worship him merely for creating us, then proceeding to fill our lives with suffering and pain? If he is real, he is not perfect, but more flawed than any human.
You are basically asking how God can be good if there is so much evil in the world. God could have gotten rid of the evil in the very beginning by killing Adam and Eve and starting over. He wages of sin are death. But he didn't. Why? I can guess. Despite all of the terrible things that go on, God uses them to accomplish something good. In the story of Joseph in Genesis, Joseph's brothers sold him as a slave. In the end, Joseph ended up saving several people from a famine. He then says at the end, "You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives." A good (or terrible, maybe) example of this would be the Holocaust. Despite how horrible that was, God used that to cause Israel to be reformed as a nation, like predicted in Ezekiel a lot earlier. It isn't exactly pleasant to think about it, but God can and will use terrible things to get stuff done. If he didn't, he wouldn't have anything to use at all.
The other part of the guess is that God's plan is to make the best possible ending. So, no matter how bad things are now, things will be okay in the end.
The last part of your post reminds me of a testimony I heard from someone in my youth group. Their life had been very bad. I won't go into all the details, but it included drugs, depression, and suicide attempts. I haven't said the worst of it, and I'm not going to. They are a Christian now. Their testimony is that, no matter how bad things get, God can help you still.
If our lives were always wonderful, then we wouldn't see our need for God. We would be content to live/die as we were.
Guys: You all say "How can God be good when there's so much bad in the world?" I have a story of my own for you.
Years and years ago, I was ten. Now, my being ten and all, I was absolutely terrified of spiders. So much that my parents put an electric spider repellent in my room. And so I let it be. But one day, I see a spider crawling around on my bed. I smoosh the spider and am about to take the spider repeller off the wall, when my dad walks in. Upon his asking what I'm doing, I answer: "The thing is broken... I'm gonna throw it away." But just after that my dad says to me: "Son, you've only seen one spider, right? Now how many have you seen it keep away?"
I think it has relevance. Just because you can't see something working, doesn't mean it's not. Now imagine God as the spider repeller, mankind as the kid, and evil as the spiders. Makes you think, doesn't it?
Quote from: cyso on March 12, 2011, 01:01:07 PM
Just because someone launches a war in the name of a religion doesn't mean it is religiously justified. I don't think the word "crusade" appears in the Bible.
Quote from: Duckling on March 05, 2011, 01:44:29 PM
What if a man or woman was the most atrocious person to have ever lived, but they didn't care?
What if they thought everything they did was right, and they were a Christian, and they prayed, and they worshipped, and they obeyed the commandments, and they never committed a deadly sin. What then, if they, throughout their whole life, wronged people to the greatest extent, while simply thinking themselves shrewd, or impassive, or oblivious?
What if they never defied their moral compass once, with no sin because they had no concept of good or evil, because they never had been told that the things they did were evil, wrong, atrocious; or maybe they had been told, but their faith blinded them, leading them to believe they were only working in the service of their Lord? No sin. God would have to let him or her in through the pearly gates, and everyone would know him or her, and they would recoil in fear of the awful person they knew in life whom they swore would not follow them into death. And "Heaven" would be as Hell. Fear, chaos, evil, lies would spread through the promised land above, and this merciless scourge without sin would leave hate and loathing where he went.
Now consider the opposite case. A man or woman learns of wrongs and rights, but they a Jew, a Muslim, a Buddhist, a Taoist, a Confucianist, an aborigine with tribal beliefs. They live their life as best they can, and they go to Hell. This is why I don't like the message Christianity tries to get across, and for other reasons, too.
And punctuate your sentences correctly, will you? It's hard to read when you don't.
Okay. I'm going to quote this verse again. Romans 3:23
For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God
You don't get into heaven because you don't sin. If that were the case, no one would get into heaven. Sin isn't violating your moral compass, it is violating God's law and living your life apart from him. It is ignoring God and telling him that you don't want to listen to him. As Christians, we still sin. This is a quote from some Christian (I forgot his name) as best I remember it.
The difference between a Christian and a Non-Christian is not that one has no sins and the other does, but that one takes part with a reconciled God against his sins while the other takes part with his sins against a dreaded God.
When a Christian gets to heaven, their sinful nature is completely erased so there will be no sin.
Quote from: Steelfist on March 02, 2011, 11:32:07 AM
If there is a god, his actions throughout the centuries have not earned him my worship, but my enmity. If there is a god, he has allowed his holy teachings to be debased, misused and distorted. If there is a god, he is a murderer - a genocidal maniac who has committed more evil than any demon in the name of a passing fancy!
Why are we supposed to worship him merely for creating us, then proceeding to fill our lives with suffering and pain? If he is real, he is not perfect, but more flawed than any human.
You are basically asking how God can be good if there is so much evil in the world. God could have gotten rid of the evil in the very beginning by killing Adam and Eve and starting over. He wages of sin are death. But he didn't. Why? I can guess. Despite all of the terrible things that go on, God uses them to accomplish something good. In the story of Joseph in Genesis, Joseph's brothers sold him as a slave. In the end, Joseph ended up saving several people from a famine. He then says at the end, "You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives." A good (or terrible, maybe) example of this would be the Holocaust. Despite how horrible that was, God used that to cause Israel to be reformed as a nation, like predicted in Ezekiel a lot earlier. It isn't exactly pleasant to think about it, but God can and will use terrible things to get stuff done. If he didn't, he wouldn't have anything to use at all.
The other part of the guess is that God's plan is to make the best possible ending. So, no matter how bad things are now, things will be okay in the end.
The last part of your post reminds me of a testimony I heard from someone in my youth group. Their life had been very bad. I won't go into all the details, but it included drugs, depression, and suicide attempts. I haven't said the worst of it, and I'm not going to. They are a Christian now. Their testimony is that, no matter how bad things get, God can help you still.
If our lives were always wonderful, then we wouldn't see our need for God. We would be content to live/die as we were.
WHat are you guys exactly arguing about now?
@ cyso: I don't get how your theory can explain why God didn't kill Adam and Eve at first. The Joseph example is irrelevant. Why would God choose to accomplish good things out of the terrible, instead of removing the source of sin at first?
@ Buggy: The topic 'How can god be good when there's so much bad in the world?' doesn't even make sense. Why can't God be good, if there's so much evil? Why can't an apple be an apple if it's in a basket full of pears? Good example though, to prove what you want to prove (I don't know what you're trying to prove, though)
Because in truth, the source of sin is ourselves. We gained the knowlege of what sin was through the very first sin. Disobeying God.
Buggy got it exactly right. We are a source of sin. But rather than removing us entirely, he just uses us to bring about something better. That's what I was trying to point out with Joseph. Selling Joseph into slavery was a terrible thing to do. But if his brothers hadn't, then many people would have died in famine.
Quote@ Buggy: The topic 'How can god be good when there's so much bad in the world?' doesn't even make sense. Why can't God be good, if there's so much evil? Why can't an apple be an apple if it's in a basket full of pears? Good example though, to prove what you want to prove (I don't know what you're trying to prove, though)
I think that the idea behind the topic 'How can God be good when there's so much bad in the world' is that people think that if God was really good, he would remove all traces of evil from the world. We being the sources of evil, that would mean removing us from the world. But God can still use evil to do whatever he wants. He can still use evil to bring about something better, so he permits it because the end result is much better.
One temptation of Jesus in the wilderness was to turn the stones in the wilderness to bread. I don't know this for sure, but I think there were probably a good number of stones. Part of what he was tempting Jesus to do was to forget about God and just do something good for himself. If everything was good in the world, we would probably forget about God.
Just because someone launches a war in the name of a religion doesn't mean it is religiously justified. I don't think the word "crusade" appears in the Bible.
Yes, but we must purge the land of evil, right?-- Demon Duck
Quote from: Duckling on March 05, 2011, 01:44:29 PM
What if a man or woman was the most atrocious person to have ever lived, but they didn't care?
What if they thought everything they did was right, and they were a Christian, and they prayed, and they worshipped, and they obeyed the commandments, and they never committed a deadly sin. What then, if they, throughout their whole life, wronged people to the greatest extent, while simply thinking themselves shrewd, or impassive, or oblivious?
What if they never defied their moral compass once, with no sin because they had no concept of good or evil, because they never had been told that the things they did were evil, wrong, atrocious; or maybe they had been told, but their faith blinded them, leading them to believe they were only working in the service of their Lord? No sin. God would have to let him or her in through the pearly gates, and everyone would know him or her, and they would recoil in fear of the awful person they knew in life whom they swore would not follow them into death. And "Heaven" would be as Hell. Fear, chaos, evil, lies would spread through the promised land above, and this merciless scourge without sin would leave hate and loathing where he went.
Now consider the opposite case. A man or woman learns of wrongs and rights, but they a Jew, a Muslim, a Buddhist, a Taoist, a Confucianist, an aborigine with tribal beliefs. They live their life as best they can, and they go to Hell. This is why I don't like the message Christianity tries to get across, and for other reasons, too.
And punctuate your sentences correctly, will you? It's hard to read when you don't.
Okay. I'm going to quote this verse again. Romans 3:23
For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God
When? I don't remember sinning.--Blasphemous Billed One
You don't get into heaven because you don't sin.
So you go to hell for not sinning?-- Insolent Insomniacal Waterfowl
If that were the case, no one would get into heaven.
People without sin would.--Mallard of Malarkey
Sin isn't violating your moral compass, it is violating God's law and living your life apart from him.
But how can God condemn a person to eternal punishment for violating a law they didn't know existed?
I would think a kind and loving God would only punish you for doing something you know is wrong.-- Funky Floater Fowl
It is ignoring God and telling him that you don't want to listen to him.
I can't say I've had the opportunity to do either. The latter's possibility is doubtful, given the current metaphysical climate, and the former is impossible, with you rubbing Him in my nose every few weeks.-- Yawning Yellow One
As Christians, we still sin. This is a quote from some Christian (I forgot his name) as best I remember it.
The difference between a Christian and a Non-Christian is not that one has no sins and the other does, but that one takes part with a reconciled God against his sins while the other takes part with his sins against a dreaded God.
When a Christian gets to heaven, their sinful nature is completely erased so there will be no sin.
Up-bup-bub-bup-BUP! TISK! I don't have any sins on me. I took a shower, and I made sure to get them all off, with soap and somewhat holy water.
And how about when an atheist gets to heaven? Then what happens? I'll bet it's more impressive than sin erasure. I'll bet Hell freezes over the very same day.
And did I mention that I reject, loathe, despise, and quite regret my sins? Well -- the ones that hurt people. The ones like not worshipping a creator that's provided scant evidence for His claim, and who is completely invincible and invulnerable and all-powerful, and therefore cannot be hurt by anything, and therefore my choosing not to worship Him for dignity and integrity's sake couldn't hurt Him a bit.
Three letters. Q, E, and D.
-- Logical Louis Parker (with apologies to Alan Moore)
Quote from: Steelfist on March 02, 2011, 11:32:07 AM
If there is a god, his actions throughout the centuries have not earned him my worship, but my enmity. If there is a god, he has allowed his holy teachings to be debased, misused and distorted. If there is a god, he is a murderer - a genocidal maniac who has committed more evil than any demon in the name of a passing fancy!
Why are we supposed to worship him merely for creating us, then proceeding to fill our lives with suffering and pain? If he is real, he is not perfect, but more flawed than any human.
You are basically asking how God can be good if there is so much evil in the world. God could have gotten rid of the evil in the very beginning by killing Adam and Eve and starting over. He wages of sin are death. But he didn't. Why? I can guess. Despite all of the terrible things that go on, God uses them to accomplish something good. In the story of Joseph in Genesis, Joseph's brothers sold him as a slave. In the end, Joseph ended up saving several people from a famine. He then says at the end, "You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives." A good (or terrible, maybe) example of this would be the Holocaust. Despite how horrible that was, God used that to cause Israel to be reformed as a nation, like predicted in Ezekiel a lot earlier. It isn't exactly pleasant to think about it, but God can and will use terrible things to get stuff done. If he didn't, he wouldn't have anything to use at all.
The other part of the guess is that God's plan is to make the best possible ending. So, no matter how bad things are now, things will be okay in the end.
The last part of your post reminds me of a testimony I heard from someone in my youth group. Their life had been very bad. I won't go into all the details, but it included drugs, depression, and suicide attempts. I haven't said the worst of it, and I'm not going to. They are a Christian now. Their testimony is that, no matter how bad things get, God can help you still.
If our lives were always wonderful, then we wouldn't see our need for God. We would be content to live/die as we were.
Yes, but I don't see the need for God anyway. Maybe God should have made that bit clearer. Sure, he helped create the whole universe, but I've lived my life without even seeing the dang fool, and I don't see any reason to love the Dude now.-- Opinionated Overbalanced One (splash!)
Quote from: Duckling on March 16, 2011, 10:30:58 PM
Just because someone launches a war in the name of a religion doesn't mean it is religiously justified. I don't think the word "crusade" appears in the Bible.
Yes, but we must purge the land of evil, right?
-- Demon Duck
Quote from: Duckling on March 05, 2011, 01:44:29 PM
What if a man or woman was the most atrocious person to have ever lived, but they didn't care?
What if they thought everything they did was right, and they were a Christian, and they prayed, and they worshipped, and they obeyed the commandments, and they never committed a deadly sin. What then, if they, throughout their whole life, wronged people to the greatest extent, while simply thinking themselves shrewd, or impassive, or oblivious?
What if they never defied their moral compass once, with no sin because they had no concept of good or evil, because they never had been told that the things they did were evil, wrong, atrocious; or maybe they had been told, but their faith blinded them, leading them to believe they were only working in the service of their Lord? No sin. God would have to let him or her in through the pearly gates, and everyone would know him or her, and they would recoil in fear of the awful person they knew in life whom they swore would not follow them into death. And "Heaven" would be as Hell. Fear, chaos, evil, lies would spread through the promised land above, and this merciless scourge without sin would leave hate and loathing where he went.
Now consider the opposite case. A man or woman learns of wrongs and rights, but they a Jew, a Muslim, a Buddhist, a Taoist, a Confucianist, an aborigine with tribal beliefs. They live their life as best they can, and they go to Hell. This is why I don't like the message Christianity tries to get across, and for other reasons, too.
And punctuate your sentences correctly, will you? It's hard to read when you don't.
Okay. I'm going to quote this verse again. Romans 3:23
For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God
When? I don't remember sinning.
--Blasphemous Billed One
You don't get into heaven because you don't sin.
So you go to hell for not sinning?
-- Insolent Insomniacal Waterfowl
If that were the case, no one would get into heaven.
People without sin would.
--Mallard of Malarkey
Sin isn't violating your moral compass, it is violating God's law and living your life apart from him.
But how can God condemn a person to eternal punishment for violating a law they didn't know existed?
I would think a kind and loving God would only punish you for doing something you know is wrong.
-- Funky Floater Fowl
It is ignoring God and telling him that you don't want to listen to him.
I can't say I've had the opportunity to do either. The latter's possibility is doubtful, given the current metaphysical climate, and the former is impossible, with you rubbing Him in my nose every few weeks.
-- Yawning Yellow One
As Christians, we still sin. This is a quote from some Christian (I forgot his name) as best I remember it.
The difference between a Christian and a Non-Christian is not that one has no sins and the other does, but that one takes part with a reconciled God against his sins while the other takes part with his sins against a dreaded God.
When a Christian gets to heaven, their sinful nature is completely erased so there will be no sin.
Up-bup-bub-bup-BUP! TISK! I don't have any sins on me. I took a shower, and I made sure to get them all off, with soap and somewhat holy water.
And how about when an atheist gets to heaven? Then what happens? I'll bet it's more impressive than sin erasure. I'll bet Hell freezes over the very same day.
And did I mention that I reject, loathe, despise, and quite regret my sins? Well -- the ones that hurt people. The ones like not worshipping a creator that's provided scant evidence for His claim, and who is completely invincible and invulnerable and all-powerful, and therefore cannot be hurt by anything, and therefore my choosing not to worship Him for dignity and integrity's sake couldn't hurt Him a bit.
Three letters. Q, E, and D.
-- Logical Louis Parker (with apologies to Alan Moore)
Quote from: Steelfist on March 02, 2011, 11:32:07 AM
If there is a god, his actions throughout the centuries have not earned him my worship, but my enmity. If there is a god, he has allowed his holy teachings to be debased, misused and distorted. If there is a god, he is a murderer - a genocidal maniac who has committed more evil than any demon in the name of a passing fancy!
Why are we supposed to worship him merely for creating us, then proceeding to fill our lives with suffering and pain? If he is real, he is not perfect, but more flawed than any human.
You are basically asking how God can be good if there is so much evil in the world. God could have gotten rid of the evil in the very beginning by killing Adam and Eve and starting over. He wages of sin are death. But he didn't. Why? I can guess. Despite all of the terrible things that go on, God uses them to accomplish something good. In the story of Joseph in Genesis, Joseph's brothers sold him as a slave. In the end, Joseph ended up saving several people from a famine. He then says at the end, "You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives." A good (or terrible, maybe) example of this would be the Holocaust. Despite how horrible that was, God used that to cause Israel to be reformed as a nation, like predicted in Ezekiel a lot earlier. It isn't exactly pleasant to think about it, but God can and will use terrible things to get stuff done. If he didn't, he wouldn't have anything to use at all.
The other part of the guess is that God's plan is to make the best possible ending. So, no matter how bad things are now, things will be okay in the end.
The last part of your post reminds me of a testimony I heard from someone in my youth group. Their life had been very bad. I won't go into all the details, but it included drugs, depression, and suicide attempts. I haven't said the worst of it, and I'm not going to. They are a Christian now. Their testimony is that, no matter how bad things get, God can help you still.
If our lives were always wonderful, then we wouldn't see our need for God. We would be content to live/die as we were.
Yes, but I don't see the need for God anyway. Maybe God should have made that bit clearer. Sure, he helped create the whole universe, but I've lived my life without even seeing the dang fool, and I don't see any reason to love the Dude now.
-- Opinionated Overbalanced One (splash!)
No, it doesn't say in the Bible that we must purge the land of evil. This is a quote from Revelation 22:11
"Let the one who does wrong continue to do wrong; let the vile person continue to be vile; let the one who does right continue to do right; and let the holy person continue to be holy."
You said yourself that you aren't perfect. You have said yourself that you have occasionally violated your own moral compass. You don't live how God would want you to live. You live apart from God.
When I said you don't get into heaven for not sinning, I meant that Christians do not go to heaven because they are perfect. They go because Jesus paid for our sins. If no one has paid for your sins, then you go to hell.
Yes, people without sin would get into heaven. There aren't any people without sin.
Ignorance of the law will not excuse you from the consequence of the law in America. It won't excuse you from the consequence of law with God, either. Just because you didn't know what the law was doesn't mean that you didn't break it. God isn't going to let you in heaven after you have broken the law. That would be about the equivalent of releasing someone for driving drunk and running someone over because they didn't know it was wrong or illegal to drive drunk. You wouldn't release him, God won't release people into heaven.
You are ignoring him. You aren't ignoring me, but you ignore him when you live your life completely apart from him and don't care a thing about him.
You have sins on you. I really hope the comment about washing sins off with soap was just a joke. Atheist don't get to heaven. And no, you can't
hurt God, but you can annoy him or make him mad. He made himself fully human. By the way, not worshiping someone for your own dignity's sake seems to be a somewhat selfish reason. Of course, since you don't think he exists, I guess that probably isn't the reason you don't worship him.
You need God because you have sinned, and the wages of sin is death (eternal death). Without God, you go to hell. With God, you don't go to hell. If you don't care at all whether or not you need him, then stop saying that you don't see your need for him. If you don't understand the process or your need for him, then please feel free to ask.
Not just with God. You need the full trinity of God. But they are all the same being.
Can a Christian friend of mine repent for me and absorb my sins? I don't sin very regularly, so it shouldn't be too much of a burden.
And, about the drunk driver, that isn't comparable. The drunk driver killed someone. I merely chose to live a life of integrity, learning, and frankly not caring what some guy a couple thousand years ago said that has now worked its way into irrelevance.
People committing victimless crimes, like indecent exposure, are given a warning, and only fined on repeat offenses, when they know the full extent of the particular law which forbids them.
It doesn't work that way. Death is the only way to get forgiveness. And the reason it's not needed today is because the perfect sacrifice died about 2000 years ago. But sins aren't transferrable that way.
Your Christian friend can't pay for his own sin, let alone yours.
God's standards of judging a lot different from your own. You might live a life of integrity by your standards (or my standards) but your good works don't cover up your bad. You still sinned and broke the law, so you have to pay for it. Before you even say that your sins are minor and God shouldn't punish you for it, I'm going to remind you that when you sin, you turn your back to God and live your own way without caring what he thinks, regardless of what you do. You said yourself that you don't care about God. Why should he let you into heaven and spend eternity with him if you don't care about him?
Oh, I don't think he should praise me. But, you know, him being a being of infinite compassion and all that, don't you think that it's a little much to eternally roast someone just because they don't care about you?
That's very strange, if you ask me.
When you sin against God, you commit treason against God. The punishment for treason is death. So, you get eternal death. You ask to be separate from God. You turn your back on him and want to live apart from him, so he grants you your wish. Being created by God, living apart from him is the same as living in hell. When you sin, you are asking to be separate from God.
There are only two options, life or death. Heaven or hell.
And before you say it, Ducky, there is no purgatory. I have not once seen anything in the bible to even suggest a middle ground.
Quote from: cyso on March 19, 2011, 11:11:42 PM
Being created by God, living apart from him is the same as living in hell.
I don't understand you. Are you saying that, having been created by God (which I wasn't -- I was the result of completely human conception, which God had no part in), I can no more live apart from him than can I live in Hell?
You're being very cryptic. Are you suggesting that living apart from him is impossible, and that we can only shun Him? That would make sense, but still...
Buggy, why would I suggest purgatory? I'm protesting the case of the fairly innocent athist, and I wouldn't want anyone to go to a Hell where fiery pitchforks went through the space that people's souls occupies, and where the kinetic energy of the environment is so great, that, were souls to have any organic and physical form, they might ignite. No way. Sounds atrocious. I mean, the scenery's nice, the people there are clever and inventive, there's no harp music... I wouldn't wish that on
anyone...
Cyso, Buggy, has it ever occurred to you that the best thing you could do for an atheist would be to put them in Hell? They'd love it. Or are you so fixated on dreams of eternal.... something... that you fail to see the perks?
Excuse me if I'm not making sense right now. It's 1 in the morning in my time zone.
QuoteI don't understand you. Are you saying that, having been created by God (which I wasn't -- I was the result of completely human conception, which God had no part in), I can no more live apart from him than can I live in Hell?
Your body was birthed through human conception, which is a concept God created. There is no life apart from God. To live apart from or separate from God is the same as living in hell, which is the second death.
QuoteCyso, Buggy, has it ever occurred to you that the best thing you could do for an atheist would be to put them in Hell? They'd love it. Or are you so fixated on dreams of eternal.... something... that you fail to see the perks?
I don't think you understand exactly what you're asking for. Have you read any descriptions of hell? It's described as a place of misery, sorrows, torment, and weeping. It is described as everlasting destruction. It's like spending eternity dying.
And not gently, quickly, or just going to sleep. A long never ending death.
There is life. There is dying. There is death. Do you mean eternal dying? Death is eternal.
Biological death, or the first death, is not eternal in a sense. Your dead body stays dead, but your soul isn't. Hell is the second death, the death that effects your soul/spirit, where you "live" apart from God in misery. Note that in the bible, spiritual death is the same as being apart from God.
The biological death is eternal biologically.
What makes the second death a death? It seems that while death is an ending, Hell is just a beginning.
I never disagreed with the first point, I was just saying that your spirit goes on.
It is spiritual death in the sense that you are separate from God and completely unable to help yourself. We are described as spiritually dead before we become Christians because our sins separate us from God. Being spiritually dead, we couldn't save or help ourselves, we couldn't become right with God, we were dead. We couldn't "do" anything spiritually. When Jesus died he gave us the power to believe and come alive. The second death is death in the sense that you are spiritually dead and with no hope of coming alive. It is condemnation to be dead forever. If you are spiritually dead but still physically alive, you may still come alive, but in the second death, that hope is dead. Hell is the end of hope to come alive. It is torment because you are separate from God, your creator, with no hope of being reconciled. It is judgment, because your sins/treason have not been atoned, so you are cast out.
Ah. I get it, somewhat. You're saying that Hell is like the embodyment of the torment and suffering that is a result of not being close to God, and is the result upon your soul, because even while you're alive, if you don't believe in God, your soul is suffering like it's in Hell, but when you become biologically dead, all that is left is your tormented soul?
If so, that's something about Christianity I never really got. I thought it was punishment, but it looks now more like a reflection of the spiritual anguish one faces as a result of separating yourself from God.
Quote from: Duckling on March 20, 2011, 09:07:46 PM
Ah. I get it, somewhat. You're saying that Hell is like the embodyment of the torment and suffering that is a result of not being close to God, and is the result upon your soul, because even while you're alive, if you don't believe in God, your soul is suffering like it's in Hell, but when you become biologically dead, all that is left is your tormented soul?
Yes, but, your soul, when you are alive, still has hope of being saved. In Hell, it is worst because your soul has no hope. It is empty except for regret. So a living person's soul now isn't suffering as much because you can still try and fill it (I say try because you can try to fill it with anything, though it won't actually fill it). In Hell, your soul is empty, and there is nothing you can do to fill it.
Quote from: Duckling on March 20, 2011, 09:07:46 PM
If so, that's something about Christianity I never really got. I thought it was punishment, but it looks now more like a reflection of the spiritual anguish one faces as a result of separating yourself from God.
That is the punishment.
To clarify my original 'genocidal maniac' point, which may have been misunderstood. I wasn't merely talking about indirect genocide. The bible mentions entire populations that god simply - wiped off the map. Real nice guy, yeah?
Don't know about you, but I wouldn't go out of my way to earn an eternity with Hitler; Why would I do it for an even worse genocidal maniac?
QuoteTo clarify my original 'genocidal maniac' point, which may have been misunderstood. I wasn't merely talking about indirect genocide. The bible mentions entire populations that god simply - wiped off the map. Real nice guy, yeah?
You're looking outside of context. Sodom and Gomorrah were the absolute worst places on the planet. So much to the point where Lot and his family moved out because they were warned that it would be destroyed by two angels, who were men, that the city tried to rape. The guys of the city that is. Now think about it.
I think there's something bit wrong here-God's all powerful right? Then why didn't he destroy Satan in the first place then? (I think Satan is the source if sin, not Adam and Eve, am I wrong?)
Would destroying him really be punishment if he simply ceased to exist? Not really.
Quote from: Revalation 20:1-3
And I saw an angel coming down out of heaven, having the key to the Abyss and holding in his hand a great chain. He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan, and bound him for a thousand years. He threw him into the Abyss, and locked and sealed it over him, to keep him from deceiving the nations anymore until the thousand years were ended. After that, he must be set free for a short time.
NIV 2011
And by destroying him, where would our free will go? If people no longer got a chance to follow the devil, would there be free will?
Yes. I don't follow the devil. We can choose to reject God. We can choose a career. We can choose to help people, or to stand oblivious.
There is very much free will aside from sin.
You aren't choosing to follow the devil in the sense that you aren't following after him and deliberately trying to do things that you think he would like. However, by choosing to live your life in rebellion to God, you are following in his footsteps.
I think Buggy's right about the free will thing. Without temptation, we would walk the only path to walk. With temptation, we have to make choices.
Quote from: Bugfartboy on March 21, 2011, 05:10:10 PM
QuoteTo clarify my original 'genocidal maniac' point, which may have been misunderstood. I wasn't merely talking about indirect genocide. The bible mentions entire populations that god simply - wiped off the map. Real nice guy, yeah?
You're looking outside of context. Sodom and Gomorrah were the absolute worst places on the planet. So much to the point where Lot and his family moved out because they were warned that it would be destroyed by two angels, who were men, that the city tried to rape. The guys of the city that is. Now think about it.
To put more emphasis on how messed up the place was, here's a biblical quote.
Genesis 19:4 Before they had gone to bed,
all the men from every part of the city of Sodom—both young and old—surrounded the house.
It's kind of ridiculous when all the men in the city want to rape 2 guys/angels who come to the town. Then, when Lot told them (all the men in the city) no, they tried to break down the door.
Quote from: cyso on March 30, 2011, 10:40:24 PM
You aren't choosing to follow the devil in the sense that you aren't following after him and deliberately trying to do things that you think he would like. However, by choosing to live your life in rebellion to God, you are following in his footsteps.
What about an Agnostic person then? I choose to believe in neither, what does that make me? Switzerland?
I think it is unfair to say that their is only one option to take in life. I think of it as a simple math problem. For example: 7
2. I can do 7 x 7 = 49 or I can do 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 = 49. Both answers are correct, its just that one simply took longer to do.
When you are an agnostic person, you chose to live your life apart from God. It's not rebellion like trying to replace God or something like that. It's more like telling God, "Screw you, I'm going to do my own thing." Not believing in God may be why you live apart from God, but that doesn't mean that you don't live apart from God. Why someone does something doesn't change what they do.
There are many ways to solve a math problem. However, there are only two types of answers: right or not right. I'm not saying that you are either a Christian or a serial killer. I'm saying that you are either a Christian and reconciled with God or not a Christian and not reconciled with God.
I don't believe I'm telling God:
Quote from: cyso on March 30, 2011, 11:10:25 PM"Screw you, I'm going to do my own thing."
I think I am more of telling him (if he exists) "I have not decided whether or not I believe in you, until more evidence is given, I remain agnostic".
what about other religions, you say that you are either Christan and Reconciled or Not, where do other religions fit in on that?
I, personally, think that it is very dangerous to see the world in black and white, because levels of grey do exist...
So you are telling him politely that you don't believe in him and that until you do, you are going to live however you want as if he didn't exist. It's a lot nicer than saying screw you, I admit, but you are still saying that you want to do your own thing and don't really care if he exists.
The last part (don't really care if he exists) is an assumption. I assume that figuring out whether or not God exists is not of major concern to you, if it is of any concern to you. I assume that, in your normal day, you don't think about God. I assume you live your life as if God were not real, and that you really don't care if God may be real as much as you care about doing the things you like to do. I assume you are not trying to discover whether or not God exists. I assume you are not looking for God. If any of these assumptions are wrong (and I wouldn't be particularly surprised if a few were) say so and tell me which ones are wrong.
If they are right, I have question for you. If you aren't looking for God, would you expect to see him even if he was there? You are agnostic. You believe that his existence is unknowable. If you have you don't look, how do you expect to see?
Of course, my assumption could be completely wrong. Sorry if it is.
Other religions fit into the Not Christian category. I'm sure a Muslim or Hindu wouldn't mind if I classified him or her as a Non-Christian, because they aren't Christians, and they know it. I'm not dividing people into groups of either x or y, with no other options. I'm dividing it into either x or not x.
An example of what I'm NOT doing: polling people and asking if they were Republican, and if they said no, writing them down as a Democrat, then making a cute little Democrat-Republican Pie Chart.
What I am doing: polling people and, if they say Republican, writing them down as that, and it they say they aren't Republican, writing them down in the category of "Not Republican." Then, I make a cute little Republican-Not Republican chart.
I don't say you are this or that, I say you are this or not this.
I have tried to look for God and I come up with mixed results. Its true that I don't look for God all the time, and I live my life like he doesn't exist some days, but their are days when I do try to look for signs of God and Vice Versa. Your right, whether or not God exists is is not a major concern of mine (but is a concern). I would rather focus on issues in the world and in my life. Does this Girl Like me? Can we solve Poverty? Am I going to get a Good Mark on my Math Test? etc. However, saying this, I still would like know the answer.
Being agnostic doesn't mean that you search (all the time) for whether or not God exists, but rather is a neutral ground where you can say, with the evidence I have found, I believe that God may or may not (or the existence of God is unknowable, as you said) exist.
I see, but still you said:
Quote from: cyso on March 30, 2011, 11:10:25 PM
I'm saying that you are either a Christian and reconciled with God or not a Christian and not reconciled with God
I understand but putting Muslims in the "Not Christian/Not Reconciled" is not fair. Why can't they be "Not Christian/Reconciled"? They are Recoiled with God, and not Christian, so it makes sense.
It would be more fair to say "Christian and Recoiled With God" and "Non Christian and Recoiled/Not Recoiled With God.
Quote from: Zackirus on March 31, 2011, 12:28:31 AM
I see, but still you said:
Quote from: cyso on March 30, 2011, 11:10:25 PM
I'm saying that you are either a Christian and reconciled with God or not a Christian and not reconciled with God
I understand but putting Muslims in the "Not Christian/Not Reconciled" is not fair. Why can't they be "Not Christian/Reconciled"? They are Recoiled with God, and not Christian, so it makes sense.
It would be more fair to say "Christian and Recoiled With God" and "Non Christian and Recoiled/Not Recoiled With God.
If I and my religion are correct, than Christians are the only people reconciled with God. If the Muslims are correct, they are the only people reconciled with God. Christianity teaches only one way to heaven. So does Islam. So, we can't both be right about the one way to be reconciled with God if our ways are different and we believe it's the only way. If it isn't the only way, then neither of us are right, because we both preach one way only. Either I am wrong or I am right. If I am right, there are two groups, Christian or Non Christians. The Christians are reconciled with God, the Non Christians are not. If I'm not right, I don't think my grouping matters very much.
There is only one way to God. You might think it is unfair. Think about it, though. No matter how many ways you work 7
2, there is only one answer. You don't have to recite a certain prayer or say a certain creed to become a Christian. You don't have to live a certain kind of life before you are saved. How you are led to become a Christian (by reading something, by hearing something, etc.) can vary, just like how you get the answer to a math problem. The thing that can't vary is the solution. There is only one solution to our sins, Jesus. How your life leads you to him isn't important. What's important is getting there.
Think of it like this: There are many ways to be led to Christ, just like there are many ways to be led to Christ. To become a Christian, you must accept what Jesus did and trust and believe in him, just like to get the answer right on a test, you have to put the answer down. No matter how you work the problem, you still have to put the answer down. There's no other way to submit the answer, just like there is no other way of becoming a Christian. You don't become a Christian by agreeing with what a pastor says or thinking it sounds nice, just like you don't get points if you just work out a problem in your head. Finally, to be reconciled with God, you must be a Christian, just like in a test, you must put the right answer to get the question correct.
Quote from: cyso on March 31, 2011, 12:57:52 AM
If I and my religion are correct, than Christians are the only people reconciled with God. If the Muslims are correct, they are the only people reconciled with God. Christianity teaches only one way to heaven. So does Islam. So, we can't both be right about the one way to be reconciled with God if our ways are different and we believe it's the only way. If it isn't the only way, then neither of us are right, because we both preach one way only. Either I am wrong or I am right. If I am right, there are two groups, Christian or Non Christians. The Christians are reconciled with God, the Non Christians are not. If I'm not right, I don't think my grouping matters very much.
I understand now, I was thinking from a side agnostic perspective (sorry about that). You are completely right.
Quote from: cyso on March 31, 2011, 12:57:52 AM
There is only one way to God. You might think it is unfair. Think about it, though. No matter how many ways you work 72, there is only one answer. You don't have to recite a certain prayer or say a certain creed to become a Christian. You don't have to live a certain kind of life before you are saved. How you are led to become a Christian (by reading something, by hearing something, etc.) can vary, just like how you get the answer to a math problem. The thing that can't vary is the solution. There is only one solution to our sins, Jesus. How your life leads you to him isn't important. What's important is getting there.
Think of it like this: There are many ways to be led to Christ, just like there are many ways to be led to Christ. To become a Christian, you must accept what Jesus did and trust and believe in him, just like to get the answer right on a test, you have to put the answer down. No matter how you work the problem, you still have to put the answer down. There's no other way to submit the answer, just like there is no other way of becoming a Christian. You don't become a Christian by agreeing with what a pastor says or thinking it sounds nice, just like you don't get points if you just work out a problem in your head. Finally, to be reconciled with God, you must be a Christian, just like in a test, you must put the right answer to get the question correct.
However, what if their is more than one answer to the question? For Example:
Your P.O.I (Point of Intersection) is (-3 , 2). Find the equation of two non-coincidental lines that pass through the P.O.I.
You could have y = x + 5 and y = -x - 1
or y = 2x + 8 and y = 2x - 4 and so on.
[spoiler=The Math][spoiler= Equation One]
y = x + 5
- y = -x - 1 0 = 2x + 6
x = -3
y = x + 5
+ y = -x - 1 2y = 4
y = 2
[/spoiler]
[spoiler= Equation Two]
y = 2x + 8
- y = 2x - 4 0 = 4x + 12
x = -3
y = 2x + 8
+ y = 2x - 4 2y = 4
y = 2
[/spoiler]
[/spoiler]
My (real) question is: are you sure God only has one answer?
Yes. I'm a Christian, so I believe there is only one answer. You're not a Christian though. So, I'm going to explain the problem, or why we have to be reconciled with God.
We don't follow God. We follow our own path. It may be intentional defiance or it may be lack of faith in God. The thing is, God is the creator and ruler of everything. He has the right to everything. He isn't a terrible ruler trying to harm his subjects or torture them. When we turn from him, it's about the equivalent of the servants of a good king or ruler refusing to do what he says and what the law demands and completely refusing to serve him, regardless of intent. This type of crime is treason. Even if you forget about all of the other bad things a person does, this crime alone is enough to earn death. God's punishment is not only the death of our bodies (separating our souls and spirits from our body) but the death of our spirits (separating our souls and spirits from him). This is basically what we ask for when we follow our own path apart from him, but it really sucks. I posted a little bit about hell a few posts back. Eternally separated from God, without hope.
So, that's why we need to be reconciled. We take off on our own path. We run away from God. We are apart from him, and need to come back to him, but our sins, our treason, separates us. We owe him a debt, a debt that must be paid. This is why works don't get you into heaven. You can't work your way to heaven. The good things you do don't erase the bad. I described us as running away from God. This is like the parable of the son that demanded his inheritance from his father, left with it, and spent it all. Living a good life and being careful with your money doesn't do you any good if you don't have any money and you took all the money from your father anyways, just like living good won't help you. You may do less bad things, you may sin less, but you never really stop sinning and you still haven't done a thing about your previous sins. All you might do is slow your present rate of sin. Those sins will get you into hell.
That is why I think good works don't cut it with God. You don't even really stop sinning, so it really doesn't matter. You can work and work and work, but you can't undo what you've done. You can try to lessen the effects, but you can't erase what you did from history. Not spending money when you owe debt is a good idea, but unless you can pay back the debt, it doesn't do you much good. You've got to pay back the debt, but you can't. Works don't pay back anything. So, any idea of getting to heaven by works is out.
You may be wondering why God doesn't just say oh well, they all screwed up, I'll let them slide. After all, he's supposed to be all loving. The thing is, he's also just. So, even though he loves you and he really doesn't like to do it, he will send people to hell. A truly just judge demands the penalty be paid and that the law be upheld. Someone has to pay the penalty. Not that God is out for blood, but the debt must be paid. You must pay for something like a speeding ticket in human courts; in God's court, you must pay for treason, and the price is your life.
So, we have to pay with our life. We can't pay with another person's life because they have to pay themselves can't really offer anything. They owe debt too. They are going to have to pay with their life. They can't give you more life because they don't have extra life to give. Now, if we had extra life, if our sinful selves could be put to death and somehow we could still live, we would be fine.
The Jews used sacrifices to pay. The thing is, animal sacrifices don't mean too much. You killed a perfect lamb. It was spotless. It never did anything that bad. It was a lamb. A lamb can't exactly give you new life so that when your sinful self dies, you don't. There isn't really anything special about a lamb, except that it was symbolic (which is why people in the old testament don't all go to hell. They put their trust in Jesus, but since he wasn't exactly around on Earth at the time, they demonstrated their trust by sacrificing lambs and other animals, which was symbolic of Jesus's death).
I think I've covered the way most religions try to pay for the debt. I think that most religions go along the lines of "work your way into happiness." Even the Jews had to sacrifice animals (and with all the associated rituals, it was work). Doing good deeds is fine. I am not in any way saying that you shouldn't do good deeds, but they aren't enough. Most of the other religions will scream at you to work harder to gain paradise. You can never work hard enough. You can't work so hard that it's like all of the screw ups you made in life are erased like they never existed. The other religions want you to do good things, but they can't help you do them. They can't help you be reconciled to God. They can just tell you what to do. I could spit out a bunch of things for you not to do, but that doesn't really help you. There is a quote from a famous Christian author John Bunyan stating "the law commands but gives me neither feet nor hands" and that basically sums up all of the work religions. You can tell someone to work hard, but you can't make them. You can tell someone to avoid all sorts of sins, but you can't make them do anything. In the quote, he was referring to the old testament law (I think) but it applies to every law. There is no power in the law. Principles may be fine, rules may be good, but they have no power to save you. You need life, not rules. If you just try to live by rules, you will fail. They can't hold you to them. They give you no power to be perfect. They can't cancel out your sins. They just serve to show you that you fail. That's one good thing about laws. When you screw them up plenty, you realize that you can't do it. You can't be perfect. You will sin. Laws expose sin and wrong doing (which some people may need). They do not correct them or pay for them, which is what we all need.
Right now, we have a fairly gloomy picture. We can't work our way into heaven, because we will fail anyways, and our works don't erase our sins. The penalty for sin is death. Not pleasant. We need new life. We can't exactly borrow our neighbors, because they need new life too. But, God does love us. So, he sends the solution. Jesus.
Jesus, fully God, but also fully human. God in flesh. Called the son of God because he was conceived in Mary by the power of God. Being fully God, he had the power to resist temptation. He could live with God because he was God. He didn't run away from God. He lived perfect. Being God, he had life. He also had no debt to pay. We, on the other hand, need life, life that doesn't have any debt to pay. We need him. He really doesn't need us, but he loves us. So, he takes our punishment. He takes our debt. He takes being cut off from God. He takes what we should have to pay. He does a bit more. He takes our sins and puts them on himself. He takes those sins to the grave. He then raises from the dead. He is God. Death does not have power over him.
He takes our sins, and we gain his righteousness. He takes our death, and we take his life. It's like our sins and our sinful self is crucified and dies, and our new self, the one full of Jesus, lives. Not that Christians are perfect. We have our new life, but the old one doesn't completely go until the end. Our sin is paid for, though. So, any punishment that should be ours is Jesus's. It's like he steps up, takes our sin on himself and brings it to the grave, then gives us life (I know I've already said this). We are no longer condemned by God, because all our sin is on Jesus. We are free from our debt.
So, do we go on sinning and living our life like we did before? The answer is no. Okay, we still sin, but our lives are different. Why? Because Christ lives in us. He lives through us. So, we still sin, because we are still prone to sin, but we do not find pleasure in sin because we have Jesus living in us, and he does not like sin. So, we try to do what is right. We still screw up. But, we don't use Christ's payment as a free pass to do whatever we want and sin however we like because we don't like to sin. His nature lives in us. It is what survives in the end. Our old bodies will die. Our souls will not, and we will get new bodies. Our old self will be completely gone.
So, we looked at our debt. We looked at why works don't reconcile us to God. We look at how, when Jesus took our sins, we are reconciled with God because Jesus carried them away and paid away our debt, so God accepts us like he wanted to. I probably didn't do the best of jobs at the end, so if you have any questions, please ask. If you think there is another way we could be reconciled that I didn't cover, please tell me.
The full quote from the Christian author and my ending note:
"Run, John, run the law commands,
But gives me neither feet nor hands;
Far better news the gospel brings:
It bids me fly; it gives me wings."
Wow, cyso, that was ... pretty much the most convincing post on this topic. I can't help feeling I should turn to Christ, as I'm currently athiest.
The was very well done Cyso.
However, I think it is unfair to say that without God, all people will sin and they will go to hell. I have three examples:
Think about (M.K.) Gandhi. He did a lot of good for the India, trying to separate from India without restoring to violence. So with that, are you saying that someone who doesn't believe in your god, will automatically go to hell, even if they were a extremely good person in their life.
Another example is a lone Hunter in a Forest. He lives all his life learning how to catch and trap animals. His father doesn't teach him about any God. Once he (The Father) dies, he is all alone in the forest. Each day he makes new traps, checks his old ones, and repairs his small shack that he lives in. He never meets another person and dies from an infection when he is 50 years old. Will this man go to Hell just because he never believed in God?
My last example is small embryo growing in a mother's whom. Once the embryo becomes 4 months old, it suddenly dies. Does this baby, having never done anything sinful in life, or knowing about any God simply go to Hell because it did not believe?
QuoteThink about (M.K.) Gandhi. He did a lot of good for the India, trying to separate from India without restoring to violence. So with that, are you saying that someone who doesn't believe in your god, will automatically go to hell, even if they were a extremely good person in their life.
Yes, because even though Gandhi did many good things, they never erased any of the bad. No matter how many good things you do, you can't erase the bad.
QuoteAnother example is a lone Hunter in a Forest. He lives all his life learning how to catch and trap animals. His father doesn't teach him about any God. Once he (The Father) dies, he is all alone in the forest. Each day he makes new traps, checks his old ones, and repairs his small shack that he lives in. He never meets another person and dies from an infection when he is 50 years old. Will this man go to Hell just because he never believed in God?
Yes. Being isolated in with his father in the forest doesn't remove the possibility of sin. For example, there is the way he treats and interacts with his father. He could be an absolute jerk to the only person he knows. Even if he wasn't, he probably wouldn't always treat or interact with his father like he should. Plus, much of the sin we do is inside. Not things like anger or sadness. Those are feelings and aren't bad by themselves. But, in this scenario, if the son had spent an hour thinking about how he should do something to his dad or hurt him in some way, he would have sinned. If he had been mad at him for a moment, he wouldn't have done anything wrong. By harboring evil thoughts, he would have sinned. I probably didn't do a good job explaining that, so I'm going to show a bible verse.
Matthew 5:27-28
"You have heard that it was said, 'You shall not commit adultery'. But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart."
I hope that clears things up. The hunter would have had to live an absolutely perfect life, which is beyond any of us. Living a simple life isn't the same as living a perfect life.
QuoteMy last example is small embryo growing in a mother's whom. Once the embryo becomes 4 months old, it suddenly dies. Does this baby, having never done anything sinful in life, or knowing about any God simply go to Hell because it did not believe?
No, because it hasn't done anything. The reason we need to be reconciled with God is that we sin. As an embryo, I don't think you are capable of sinning. Here is a verse from the bible.
2 Samuel 12:23 "But now that he is dead, why should I go on fasting? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not return to me."
Just to clarify, David commits adultery with one of his soldiers wife. She becomes pregnant. He recalls the soldier to Jerusalem to be with his wife so it will look like the son is actually the soldiers. He refuses to sleep with his wife because all of his fellow soldiers are out fighting. So, David sends him into battle and orders his commander to put him in the fiercest part of the battle. The soldier dies. David marries the soldier's wife. A prophet comes and brings the issue to light. David repents, and his sins are forgiven, but there is a consequence. As stated in 2 Samuel 12:10 Now, therefore, the sword will never depart from your house, because you despised me and took the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your own.' So, a lot of David's family will die. David's newborn son is one of them. He dies after seven days. David then makes the above statement. The child was 7 days old, and yet David still says he will go to him (in heaven). So, I do not think embryos go to hell.
Before anyone says that it was unfair for God to cause problems in David's family: All of the problems in David's family were caused by conflicts between family members. The conflicts were probably a consequence of his sin. For example, when Solomon (son of the soldier's former wife) was made king, there was conflict between him and his older brother. If David hadn't sinned, this conflict wouldn't have existed.
Quote from: Idozen Cair on March 31, 2011, 07:40:07 AM
Wow, cyso, that was ... pretty much the most convincing post on this topic. I can't help feeling I should turn to Christ, as I'm currently athiest.
If you want to, please PM me about this.
A fairly large quote from Cyso. I couldn't pick it apart.
Quote from: Cyso
We don't follow God. We follow our own path. It may be intentional defiance or it may be lack of faith in God. The thing is, God is the creator and ruler of everything. He has the right to everything. He isn't a terrible ruler trying to harm his subjects or torture them. When we turn from him, it's about the equivalent of the servants of a good king or ruler refusing to do what he says and what the law demands and completely refusing to serve him, regardless of intent. This type of crime is treason. Even if you forget about all of the other bad things a person does, this crime alone is enough to earn death. God's punishment is not only the death of our bodies (separating our souls and spirits from our body) but the death of our spirits (separating our souls and spirits from him). This is basically what we ask for when we follow our own path apart from him, but it really sucks. I posted a little bit about hell a few posts back. Eternally separated from God, without hope.
So, that's why we need to be reconciled. We take off on our own path. We run away from God. We are apart from him, and need to come back to him, but our sins, our treason, separates us. We owe him a debt, a debt that must be paid. This is why works don't get you into heaven. You can't work your way to heaven. The good things you do don't erase the bad. I described us as running away from God. This is like the parable of the son that demanded his inheritance from his father, left with it, and spent it all. Living a good life and being careful with your money doesn't do you any good if you don't have any money and you took all the money from your father anyways, just like living good won't help you. You may do less bad things, you may sin less, but you never really stop sinning and you still haven't done a thing about your previous sins. All you might do is slow your present rate of sin. Those sins will get you into hell.
That is why I think good works don't cut it with God. You don't even really stop sinning, so it really doesn't matter. You can work and work and work, but you can't undo what you've done. You can try to lessen the effects, but you can't erase what you did from history. Not spending money when you owe debt is a good idea, but unless you can pay back the debt, it doesn't do you much good. You've got to pay back the debt, but you can't. Works don't pay back anything. So, any idea of getting to heaven by works is out.
That, I would think, applies to the first.
For the second, I have an example. Say a man grows up in the USA. He's raised in a world where killing is common. Thus he remains ignorant that it's illegal and wrong to kill. So then this man goes to a larger city where law enforcement is strict. So, say someone ticks this man off and the man strikes back and kills the man. What happens to this man? He left a pretty bloody trail leading right to him. Would the government simply extemp him from punishment because he was ignorant? Nope. The same is with God. An excuse, ignorance be not.
Now on to the third.
Quote from: Luke 18:16
But Jesus called the children to him and said, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these.
There is an age of accountability. As the above quote states, Jesus clearly says that children "such as these" get to heaven. Therefore, an unborn would as well.
Reply Part One:
[spoiler=Intellectual Property]
Quote from: cyso on March 31, 2011, 03:18:31 AM
Yes. I'm a Christian, so I believe there is only one answer. You're not a Christian though. So, I'm going to explain the problem, or
why we have to be reconciled with God.
We don't follow God. We follow our own path. It may be intentional defiance or it may be lack of faith in God. The thing is, God is
the creator and ruler of everything. He has the right to everything.
Okay, I'm going to have to interject right here, and say how I think about the matter. I'm going to be doing this a lot during the
whole reply, so if you won't be swayed either way, you can tune out now. Anywho, while God may have been the ultimate creator of
everything, I must say that even if you came up with the idea, it might be your intellectual property, but it's certainly not yours.
Y'see, the way intellectual property works is that you come up with an idea, and when you get the rights to the idea, you have the
rights to say yea or nay to anyone that wants to make an implementation of the idea. However, once they recieve the rights to use the
instance of the idea's form, you, as the intellectual property owner, cannot actually take the property from the new owner. It's still
your intellectual property, but the physical property is theirs, and you have no claim whatsoever to it. I know that according to you,
His Holiness created everything in the universe, but he didn't touch it until a couple of thousand years later, when Biblical times
came along, and anything that happened in between was without His hand in it. Animals reproduced, ate, slept, and when they were born,
they were not just created. The whole process of conception and birth went smoothly without Him, and any creation that appeared to
happen was the result of subroutines He came up with so He wouldn't have to deal with all this.
The reason I digress into the topic of this supposed period of nonintervention is that in modern day, conception appears to work in
much the same way it did back then. Evolution can't exist (that would imply that the Earth is older than 6000 yrs. old -- GASP), so
nothing changed. Therefore, God doesn't have a hand in birth. He doesn't, and can't possibly be responsible for everyone's
characteristics any more than he is responsible for creating the universe.
The other thing about intellectual property is that it runs out after 14 years; so God can't possibly own, or have any rights to us,
at all whatsoever. QED.[/spoiler]
[spoiler=Treason and Servitude]
Quote from: cyso on March 31, 2011, 03:18:31 AM
He isn't a terrible ruler trying to harm his subjects or torture them. When we turn from him, it's about the equivalent of the
servants of a good king or ruler[,] refusing to do what he says1 and what the law demands2 and completely
refusing to serve him3, regardless of intent. This type of crime is treason.
Statement 1: Oh, he isn't a terrible ruler, eh? That's definitely up for debate, seeing as he meets not a single criterion for being a
good ruler. He lets His people die by the thousands, by the millions because of rampant disease and famine. Instead of acting upon
this like He can, he is completely aloof, cold, and not remotely interested in what his people are doing.
Clause 2, Dependent: Neither I nor any other atheist agnostics have turned from God, but rather simply wait for God to show any signs
of life. For all I know, God might have died 2000 years ago -- wait a sec. He did. Point is, I don't want to emptily worship a dead
God, so I think God ought to check in on us every once in a while to see how we're doing, and to show He hasn't kicked the ultimate
bucket. That is, if He really wanted people with sense to worship Him. I have not turned, but rather am truly cautious to face.
Clause 3, Independent: Servants of a good king, eh? I'm nobody's servant, and I refuse to serve anyone I can't see. Case Closed.
Footnote 1: He hasn't said anything to me, so I'm not about to make any huge "leaps of faith" about what he may or may not have
intended.
Footnote 2: I don't sin... much. And all absolute rulers that proclaim themselves to be also divine monarchs have been deposed by now,
so it's not looking good for His Holiness. In this day and age, we can't afford to bow down to some guy we can't see.
Footnote 3: I'm not refusing. He hasn't asked. And the other thing. "Regardless of intent"? On whose part. You really oughtn't say
these things without making yourself understandable. Some people actually read this.
Clause 4, Independent: Treason? More like insubordination, and possibly insolence, but ignoring a God that never talks to you is not
"a crime against your sovereign of the greatest extent. Nonworship is nothing compared to Satan's/Lucifer's crime of ultimate
betrayal. Overall, I think God, if he exists, is an overreaching, unreasonable (in that one cannot reason with Him), tyrannical drama
queen.
[/spoiler]
[spoiler=Helldeath]
Quote from: cyso on March 31, 2011, 03:18:31 AM
Even if you forget about all of the other bad things a person does, this crime alone is enough to earn death. God's punishment is not
only the death of our bodies (separating our souls and spirits from our body) but the death of our spirits (separating our souls and
spirits from him). This is basically what we ask for when we follow our own path apart from him, but it really sucks. I posted a
little bit about hell a few posts back. Eternally separated from God, without hope.
So, the way I see it, it would appear that just living is enough to earn death. That's the logical conclusion, right? Everything
living dies, and dying sucks, and things that suck are God punishing us, therefore God punishes us for living. That's not nice. That's
spiteful.
The first death isn't punishment, as there is no noticeable difference in the manner of death of those who "sin" and those who get
their sins absorbed by the Jesus sponge. And if you're saying that the two happen at the same time... (which I can only assume that
you are) I would have to say that I don't want my soul and spirit (is there a difference?) attached to God in the first place? Can I
make that choice? What would spiritual death during biological life be like? Would it be living Hell? Seeing as there have been no
reported cases of living Hell, I can only presume not.
FYI, I'm not asking to live apart. I'm just living in a way that is not parasitically depended on the being who used to own the
intellectual property rights to my kind and is now trying to (poorly) control us in subtle ways. No thanks.
And about that bit: "eternally separated from God, and without hope". I should hope I'm separated from God, and without hope of what?
Hope of being stuck back on, like one of so many pieces of chewed gum that have been deemed Not Tasty and thrown into the Great Trash
Bin? Please.
[/spoiler]
[spoiler=Debt?]
Quote from: cyso on March 31, 2011, 03:18:31 AM
So, that's why we need to be reconciled. We take off on our own path. We run away from God. We are apart from him, and need to come
back to him, but our sins, our treason, separates us. We owe him a debt, a debt that must be paid.
Hold on a moment. When did ignoring someone that has provided you with no evidence that they haven't died yet consitute a debt? Is
that a common sense thing? Or is that one of those wonderful insights one only gets if one is a Christian?
[/spoiler]
[spoiler=Inheritance]
Quote from: cyso on March 31, 2011, 03:18:31 AM
This is why works don't get you into heaven. You can't work your way to heaven. The good things you do don't erase the bad. I
described us as running away from God. This is like the parable of the son that demanded his inheritance from his father, left with
it, and spent it all. Living a good life and being careful with your money doesn't do you any good if you don't have any money and you
took all the money from your father anyways, just like living good won't help you. You may do less bad things, you may sin less, but
you never really stop sinning and you still haven't done a thing about your previous sins. All you might do is slow your present rate
of sin. Those sins will get you into hell.
Thing is, the father was obviously an idiot for letting the son go away with the inheritance.
First off, the father could have made clear to the son the value of spending money wisely.
Second, the father had no obligation to give the inheritance to the son.
Third, the son was not in the wrong by demanding his inheritance, apart from the fact that his father wasn't dead yet (a minor
matter).
Fourth, why didn't the son get a job?
Fifth, he must have spent it on something nice, eh? His whole inheritance?
Sixth, the son was even less in the wrong if the father was missing for 2000 years, presumed dead.
[/spoiler]
[spoiler=Good works and Lifedebt]
Quote from: cyso on March 31, 2011, 03:18:31 AM
That is why I think good works don't cut it with God. You don't even really stop sinning, so it really doesn't matter. You can work
and work and work, but you can't undo what you've done. You can try to lessen the effects, but you can't erase what you did from
history. Not spending money when you owe debt is a good idea, but unless you can pay back the debt, it doesn't do you much good.
You've got to pay back the debt, but you can't. Works don't pay back anything. So, any idea of getting to heaven by works is out.
You may be wondering why God doesn't just say oh well, they all screwed up, I'll let them slide. After all, he's supposed to be all
loving. The thing is, he's also just. So, even though he loves you and he really doesn't like to do it, he will send people to hell. A
truly just judge demands the penalty be paid and that the law be upheld. Someone has to pay the penalty. Not that God is out for
blood, but the debt must be paid. You must pay for something like a speeding ticket in human courts; in God's court, you must pay for
treason, and the price is your life.
Honestly, how often do people ususally sin? I don't sin... much (except for blasphemy ;)), as I said, so I'm already accumulating sin slowly, not to mention the fact that in our legal system, minor infractions can be paid off with community service, and thus yet smaller sins must be paid off with good deeds? Or are you saying that the law of God is completely different, and you can't truly compare the two? Renders Article I, Section II, Clause 3 of your monologue null.
You keep saying that everybody sins, almost constantly. I don't believe that, and I also think that if the religion says that if you think a mean thought in your head, you boil forever if you don't spend the rest of your life in awe of some being in the sky you can't even see and have recieved no confirmation of the existence of.
"Just"??!! Since when is a being that sends Gandhi to hell and Hitler to heaven "just"???
And finally, God can't possibly love us if he just sends us to Hell on a regular basis.
"If you love something set it free. If it comes back to you, it's yours. If it doesn't, it never was."
-- Richard Bach
If there is a true God, he would let people make up their mind about whether to believe or not, and if He wanted supporters, he wouldn't threaten them, but rather provide prophets every once in a while, not just a lot all at once. And then, when they died, everyone would go to Heaven, because God would have a decent sense of humour, and have a little I-told-you-so moment every three seconds. That would be an all-loving God.
Oh! One more thing: I don't understand the whole thing with the first and second death. The first is biological, and God has no influence, but then the second is spiritual, and is when you separate yourself from God. I already did that, so God really seems to have no more aces up his sleeve.
[/spoiler]
Very well written, cyso (http://sinisterdesign.net/forum/index.php?topic=624.msg34525#msg34525).
Nevertheless, I have a couple of comments to do.
All the arguments you gave can be given by most common religions (with some small adjustments). So, how can one choose the right religion?
As I said before, I chose to believe that Science is the way to get to the Truth. So, I tend to rationalize everything. That's what I did in this post.
In my view, there are (at least) 3 hypothesis regarding the existence of God(s):
0: There are no God(s);
1: There is a God (or a set of Gods) and those who doesn't follow his (their) laws are sinners;
2: There is a God (or a set of Gods) and most common religions are correct in their views.
If Hypothesis 0 is true, then there is not much to say.
If Hypothesis 1 is true, then most people on Earth are sinners and will go to hell. Furthermore, all people that ever lived were sinners as well and went to hell.
Let's assume that the Christian God is the one that exists (a similar argument can be given to most of other religions). Now, think about the native Americans that lived before the XV century. They never had the chance to know that Christ ever existed, so they don't believe in the Christian God. Hence, either
a) They were sinners or;
b) They weren't sinners because they had no chance.
In your reply to Zackirus (http://sinisterdesign.net/forum/index.php?topic=624.msg34578#msg34578), you say, option a) is the correct one in a similar case.
In my view, option b) and Hypothesis 2 are more or less the same thing.
Option a), however, has a problem: it's not really fair. And if God is good and fair, He should give a chance to everybody to follow him. Otherwise, we would have a contradiction. It's harsh to call someone a traitor when he didn't had a chance to know the rules.
If Hypothesis 2 is true, we have the problem that most common religions contradict each other in one or other aspect.
The most common one is: if you don't follow us, you will go to hell. Now, if we take this literally, everybody will go to hell.
The way I see out of it (not that I need it) is to claim that God's laws are interpreted by humans. Humans have flaws and misunderstood that part (and others too, probably). And a reasonable alternative was to say that if you follow a religion like most common religions, then you may avoid going to hell if you don't sin a lot.
Even this interpretation starts to get tricky because most religions speak about good deeds to go to heaven. The point about non believing being considered treason is a very strong one. I only find one weakness in it: if we humans are flawed, some of us might have an harder time to see God. Should those flawed humans go to hell? In my view, this is not in agreement with a kind and fair God.
Anyway, I'm not trying to say that I'm right and others are wrong. I'm just putting here my view of the Universe.
One more thing: how can we distinguish between the good God and the bad Devil? Why should we be based on a text written by a flawed human?
Quote from: cyso on April 02, 2011, 06:28:36 PM
QuoteThink about (M.K.) Gandhi. He did a lot of good for the India, trying to separate from India without restoring to violence. So with that, are you saying that someone who doesn't believe in your god, will automatically go to hell, even if they were a extremely good person in their life.
Yes, because even though Gandhi did many good things, they never erased any of the bad. No matter how many good things you do, you can't erase the bad.
But that wasn't the question, the question was: "Would he go to hell for not believing in God?" not, "Would he go to hell for his deeds?"
Quote from: cyso on April 02, 2011, 06:28:36 PM
Yes. Being isolated in with his father in the forest doesn't remove the possibility of sin. For example, there is the way he treats and interacts with his father. He could be an absolute jerk to the only person he knows. Even if he wasn't, he probably wouldn't always treat or interact with his father like he should. Plus, much of the sin we do is inside. Not things like anger or sadness. Those are feelings and aren't bad by themselves. But, in this scenario, if the son had spent an hour thinking about how he should do something to his dad or hurt him in some way, he would have sinned. If he had been mad at him for a moment, he wouldn't have done anything wrong. By harboring evil thoughts, he would have sinned. I probably didn't do a good job explaining that, so I'm going to show a bible verse.
Matthew 5:27-28
“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery'. But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart."
I hope that clears things up. The hunter would have had to live an absolutely perfect life, which is beyond any of us. Living a simple life isn't the same as living a perfect life.
Once again, not the question, the question is, "Would he go to hell if he never knew God existed, and, therefore, could not believe?" not, "Could he still sin if he didn't know about god?"
Hm. Duckling makes a lot of sense. To simplify:
Why would and should we go to hell for not believing in a god that doesn't even show he exists?
Why would and should we serve anyone that we can't see?
Why would ignoring someone that doesn't even show he exists be a debt to non-believers?
I'm atheistic but I'm an aetheistic existentialist.
Psst. Holy Nameless. Please correct your spelling; you're making us atheists look bad it looks silly.
I don't do "seplilng"