# Whats your religion



## tagzard (Apr 9, 2011)

Just woundering what your guys religion is. Cause RELIGION RULES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## The Catboy (Apr 9, 2011)

I don't really have one. I just have my own faith.
I believe in a God, can I prove in this God, not really, but can I disprove God? No I can not.
So really I believe in the religion of Yes


----------



## Forstride (Apr 9, 2011)

I'm a Christian, and I'm proud to be one.


----------



## Nujui (Apr 9, 2011)

A Gay Little Catboy said:
			
		

> I don't really have one. I just have my own faith.
> I believe in a God, can I prove in this God, not really, but can I disprove God? No I can not.
> So really I believe in the religion of Yes


That's pretty much mine in a nutshell too.


----------



## Ikki (Apr 9, 2011)

I believe in something that created shctuff, being it nature, a superior entity, Momma Panda or whatever. I think monkat had to do with it.


I don't worship anything nor follow any cult or whatever.


Or whatever.


----------



## RoMee (Apr 9, 2011)

until I see proof of a God, I'm a proud Atheist


----------



## cobleman (Apr 9, 2011)

Neutral to many people argue on what is or what was or how it should be.
Religion brings both Peace and War at the same time.
It cant be proven or disproven. Its like asking why are we here.
People will beleive what they want too believe "Free Will" isnt it great.


----------



## machomuu (Apr 9, 2011)

A Gay Little Catboy said:
			
		

> I don't really have one. I just have my own faith.
> I believe in a God, can I prove in this God, not really, but can I disprove God? No I can not.
> So really I believe in the religion of Yes


Holy crap (no pun intended), I didn't know there was another temper with the same religion/religious philosophy as me.  This is a real surprise.


----------



## klim28 (Apr 9, 2011)

Roman Catholic... and very proud to be one.


----------



## DarkShinigami (Apr 9, 2011)

i believe in god but i dont believe in the religions.  i dont believe this jesus crap no offence while most of my family does.  i believe in a higher power that cant be proven or disproven.



			
				Duskye said:
			
		

> A Gay Little Catboy said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



so i guess im like these two


----------



## ShadowFyre (Apr 9, 2011)

Apatheism. God shouldn't dictate anything we do, and we should act morally right just because it is, not cause of Heaven/Hell.


----------



## DrOctapu (Apr 9, 2011)

A Gay Little Catboy said:
			
		

> I don't really have one. I just have my own faith.
> I believe in a God, can I prove in this God, not really, but can I disprove God? No I can not.
> So really I believe in the religion of Yes


That's pretty much agnosticism.

As for me, I'm a die-hard* atheist*. I find the idea that we're the result of thousands of years of natural selection and trying and retrying to create a perfect species far more interesting and plausible than "god did it." I have better things to do than fear atheists and hate people who aren't heterosexual Christians who go to church every Sunday. If you have any questions and don't just want to argue I suggest reading The Origin of Species or, if you don't have time, skim through Baba Brinkman's Evolution Guide album. Kinda geeky, but a good way to get a good idea of evolutional theory quickly. You can PM me if you want to argue with me.


----------



## Densetsu (Apr 9, 2011)

machomuu said:
			
		

> A Gay Little Catboy said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Is it so surprising?  Plenty of people share this philosophy, or variations of it.

*EDIT*
Ninja'd by chao1212


----------



## The Catboy (Apr 9, 2011)

chao1212 said:
			
		

> A Gay Little Catboy said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I am pretty much my own spin on that.


----------



## KingVamp (Apr 9, 2011)

The way I see it is God made evolution. So yea... 

God cares. If God dictates then there be no bad and only "good" without freedom. 

Pretty much act right/be good like God want you to and believe. 

tagzard what is yours?


----------



## Dangy (Apr 9, 2011)

Roman Catholic.


----------



## tagzard (Apr 9, 2011)

KingVamp said:
			
		

> The way I see it is God made evolution. So yea...
> 
> God cares. If God dictates then there be no bad and only "good" without freedom.
> 
> ...


im a jehovahs witness and im proud to be one. even though my religion has alot of haters i stand strong and im pround to be a witness. i shall stay a witness forever.


----------



## Ikki (Apr 9, 2011)

tagzard said:
			
		

> im a jehovahs witness and i proud to be one. even though my religion has alot of haters i stand strong and im pround to be a witness.


It really just gets hate because they stroll by your house every two days and want to tell you about their beliefs. It's pretty annoying when you're doing other stuff.


----------



## KingdomBlade (Apr 9, 2011)

Officially, I'm Roman Catholic, although in terms of actual belief, I'm Secular Humanist. I secretly dislike the Church and its practices, although only my friends know this.

Proud to be a Secular Humanist.


----------



## KingVamp (Apr 9, 2011)

Ikki said:
			
		

> tagzard said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I mean it fine for people to state their religion, but there is a place, time and manner to do it.

Some just place a flyer on the door or something. Quite reasonable.


----------



## DrOctapu (Apr 9, 2011)

Ikki said:
			
		

> tagzard said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That reminds me of those mormon ads I constantly get on youtube.

EDIT: Also, saying you're "proud to be" anything is instantly going to get you hated by anyone who doesn't agree.


----------



## Nathan Drake (Apr 9, 2011)

I'm an atheist. That's an absence of religion by the way, for anybody who tries to argue that it is a religion. Just saying that, as I know people that will argue to no end that it's a religion and it annoys me.


----------



## Ikki (Apr 9, 2011)

KingVamp said:
			
		

> Ikki said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Funny thing is they actually give you a flyer (more like a little book) after they're done talking or you tell them off.


----------



## tagzard (Apr 9, 2011)

Ikki said:
			
		

> KingVamp said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


if people dont want to listen we dont mind people saying im sorry im not interested. its that simple


----------



## PeregrinFig (Apr 9, 2011)

I don't even know what to call myself any more, I'm leaning towards agnostic. I was raised to be a Christian since I could barely talk, but as I got older I started thinking logically about things more and more, and science makes more sense than creationism in many ways. Natural selection seems virtually indisputable. Still, though, I can't just write off the possibility of some higher being. And, maybe this is just because habits don't die easily, but whenever I find myself stressed or in a tight situation I pray, if nothing else to calm my nerves.


----------



## Zetta_x (Apr 9, 2011)

I believe the most powerful object(s) in the universe (+ any other existential/transcendental realms) is God(s). 

Any other inference on God is speculation and subject to be disproved. Even my definition requires some subjective views on what is the most powerful. Notice I didn't even specify if it is a living being or not.


----------



## Zerousen (Apr 9, 2011)

Buddhist. And about religion being great, sure, I guess it somehow gives us something to believe in, to maybe strive for after we die, but I hate how many religions are the cause of deaths throughout history, and I wonder how the world would be if there were not to be religion.


----------



## SinHarvest24 (Apr 9, 2011)

mom and dad are hindu. I seek my own path...religion sorta separate us....i don't like it.


----------



## awssk8er (Apr 9, 2011)

I believe in a God, but I try to avoid specific religions.

I think every "Organized" religion is bullshit and a scam, but I just don't talk about religion because it ends up in fighting.

I just live life, and try not to think about how the life was created and what not.


----------



## imshortandrad (Apr 9, 2011)

Roman Catholic.


----------



## Densetsu (Apr 9, 2011)

awssk8er said:
			
		

> I think every "Organized" religion is bullshit and a scam, but I just don't talk about religion because it ends up in fighting.


I wouldn't exactly say that, because I do know some people who really have changed for the better after finding a path.  It gets bad when people take religions out of context, but in those cases where religion makes someone a better person, it's definitely a good thing.  

I don't follow any particular religion, but I have friends of just about every faith, from both ends of the spectrum of hardcore atheist to devout, God-fearing follower.  As long as you have an open mind it's generally easy to talk to people about their religion and not end up fighting.


----------



## 1234turtles (Apr 9, 2011)

tagzard said:
			
		

> KingVamp said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


what congregation do you go to i go to hampton east


----------



## junkerde (Apr 9, 2011)

```
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBVrPG2qmnI
```
POWER OF RELigION!


----------



## Presto99 (Apr 9, 2011)

I'm LDS (Mormon). Say what you want, but yeah.


----------



## cruddybuddy (Apr 9, 2011)

Nathan Drake said:
			
		

> I'm an atheist. That's an absence of religion by the way, for anybody who tries to argue that it is a religion. Just saying that, as I know people that will argue to no end that it's a religion and it annoys me.



Either you're wrong and atheism is a religion, or you're a *censored by an atheist moderator* for posting a reply on a thread asking about your religion. Your enlightened mind really didn't see that problem?


----------



## Nujui (Apr 9, 2011)

Let's try not too argue here ok? This is a touchy subject.


----------



## Necron (Apr 9, 2011)

I'm Christian. But I also share most of the scientific theories (less the evolutionary one). I think they explain the same things in other ways and with scientific basis.


----------



## s4mid4re (Apr 9, 2011)

I'm one of the lesser Christian Asians.

Not trying to be stereotypical or racist, but I believe most Eastern Asia people are Buddhists or Atheist.


----------



## Zerousen (Apr 9, 2011)

s4mid4re said:
			
		

> I'm one of the lesser Christian Asians.
> 
> Not trying to be stereotypical or racist, but I believe most Eastern Asia people are Buddhists or Atheist.


Strange, All of the Asians I know are Christian and make fun of our religions.....I've always thought that most Asians (at least where I lived) were Christian, making me feel very left out.


----------



## awssk8er (Apr 9, 2011)

Densetsu9000 said:
			
		

> awssk8er said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yeah, I know what you mean. I thought of that too before posting that, but whatever.

I don't know. I just feel like people take religion waaaay too seriously.


----------



## Nujui (Apr 9, 2011)

awssk8er said:
			
		

> Densetsu9000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That reminds me of my cousin's parents taking all of his pokemon stuff and throwing it away because the original name was Pocket Monsters. They were very religious.


----------



## KingVamp (Apr 9, 2011)

tagzard said:
			
		

> if people dont want to listen we dont mind people saying im sorry im not interested. its that simple


But it still a bother to people. I do not see the need to bother people when you can just put a well place flyer/booklet.
I seen 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 jehovahs witness do it. 

The manner of something done can help change minds.

Ok done.


----------



## Zerousen (Apr 9, 2011)

KingVamp said:
			
		

> tagzard said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I have plenty of people who dress up and walk into my neighborhood to try to get us into Christianity, and while I do find them friendly and nice, I also find it pretty annoying at some points.


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Apr 9, 2011)

I'm agnostic. A pretty fair compromise between the two extremes, but I'm still damned!


----------



## DrOctapu (Apr 9, 2011)

On a related note, some church in my town was protesting abortion. We have no abortion clinics and maybe ten non-christians, total. People take this way too seriously.


----------



## .Chris (Apr 9, 2011)

klim28 said:
			
		

> Roman Catholic... and very proud to be one.


Same here, it must be the Filipino part of us.


----------



## KingdomBlade (Apr 9, 2011)

RoboticBuddy said:
			
		

> klim28 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Erm.. nope. Given up on it. But I haven't yet had a friend that wasn't Roman Catholic, nearly all of them are. Eh.. Filipino Culture I guess. I respect it, although I pretend to be "one of them" just because I go to a Catholic School, although not a very strict one since they allow homosexuals and people from other religions.


----------



## Prophet (Apr 9, 2011)

I'm a Platonist. Though that it isn't a religion in the "traditional" sense, I do personally find it to be a spiritual affair.


----------



## cruddybuddy (Apr 9, 2011)

Funny how the post showing the fallacy in an atheist's argument (not even about God) was the only one removed from this thread. The only one. Yeah, that happens a lot when people can't back up an argument, they censor you, or have someone else censor you. It doesn't make a strong case for atheism, does it?

Why am I even replying? I've said far more "offensive" things in the past when this website wasn't moderated by idealogical bullies.


----------



## KingVamp (Apr 9, 2011)

KingdomBlade said:
			
		

> RoboticBuddy said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Allowing homosexuals and people from other religions could be seen as strict. Wouldn't that be discrimination if the didn't? 

Idk much about (anything about 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




) Roman Catholic ,but wouldn't discrimination towards them be against their teachings?


----------



## Prophet (Apr 9, 2011)

cruddybuddy said:
			
		

> Funny how the post showing the fallacy in an atheist's argument (not even about God) was the only one removed from this thread. The only one. Yeah, that happens a lot when people can't back up an argument, they censor you, or have someone else censor you. It doesn't make a strong case for atheism, does it?
> 
> Why am I even replying? I've said far more "offensive" things in the past when this website wasn't moderated by idealogical bullies.



Cruddy you're still alive  
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




I haven't seen you around in awhile man. Just Between me and you, you've always been my personal favorite amongst the many GBAtemp trolls. (Of course, don't tell Urza I said that)

With that said, I'm not sure if your being serious or not right now...?


----------



## Nathan Drake (Apr 9, 2011)

cruddybuddy said:
			
		

> Funny how the post showing the fallacy in an atheist's argument (not even about God) was the only one removed from this thread. The only one. Yeah, that happens a lot when people can't back up an argument, they censor you, or have someone else censor you. It doesn't make a strong case for atheism, does it?
> 
> Why am I even replying? I've said far more "offensive" things in the past when this website wasn't moderated by idealogical bullies.



You act as if atheism has a one of a kind meaning for people. I choose atheism, as I have no reason to believe in God or that there even is a God like entity. I don't need it, and the times that I did, nothing came of it. It has never helped me, it never will. I choose atheism knowing that it is the only path for somebody such as myself.


----------



## bowlofspiders (Apr 9, 2011)

I am a Christian.


----------



## Thesolcity (Apr 9, 2011)

Christian. Proud to be.


----------



## CarbonX13 (Apr 9, 2011)

Pure Land Buddhist. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	






			
				s4mid4re said:
			
		

> I'm one of the lesser Christian Asians.
> 
> Not trying to be stereotypical or racist, but I believe most Eastern Asia people are Buddhists or Atheist.
> The Chinese are either Buddhist, Taoist, or a hybrid of both (based on traditional customs, they believe in both). Most Japanese do not state their belief in a religion. The vast majority of Koreans are Christian, while a significant chunk are Buddhist. Quite frankly, I think most East Asians are at least somewhat religious, rather than not believing at all.
> ...


In Vancouver, most of the immigrants from South Korea are Christians, and they tend to get quite bashful when caught up with people of other religions. Most Chinese immigrants don't really attend religious events, but do believe in some Buddhist and Taoist ideas and such. On an international level, there are far more Buddhists in East Asia than there are Christians.


----------



## cruddybuddy (Apr 9, 2011)

Nathan Drake said:
			
		

> cruddybuddy said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Well, my comment wasn't even about atheism. Someone was trying to argue that atheism is not a religion. I was merely pointing out that the very act of replying that one is an atheist in a thread about religious sort of defeats the claim that atheism is not a religion. Why don't we all post our favorite toothpaste brand too while we're at it!


----------



## Prophet (Apr 9, 2011)

Nathan Drake said:
			
		

> You act as if atheism has a one of a kind meaning for people. I choose atheism, as I have no reason to believe in God or that there even is a God like entity. I don't need it, and the times that I did, nothing came of it. It has never helped me, it never will. I choose atheism knowing that it is the only path for somebody such as myself.



Quick question. What attracts an atheist to a thread titled "Whats your religion"? I mean, if there was a thread titled "Whats your favorite ice cream flavor?" and you didn't like ice cream to begin with, would you enter and be like: 

"None. I don't eat ice cream. I choose an ice-cream-less lifestyle  as I have no reason to eat ice cream. I don't need it, and the times I did eat ice cream, nothing came of it. It has never helped me, it never will. I choose to abstain from ice cream eating, knowing that it is the only path for somebody such as myself." 

Really, who would do that except someone you wanted to inject themselves into the center of a conversation that they have no logical reason to be in to begin with.


----------



## Nathan Drake (Apr 9, 2011)

cruddybuddy said:
			
		

> Nathan Drake said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I was the one who said it, and stating that I am in a thread regarding religion is saying that I don't actually have a religion. Atheism on its own though, isn't a religion. A religion is belief in a deity of some kind with a system of beliefs to go with it. Atheism defies this by denying a deity figure entirely, thus having no religious beliefs for lack of a figure to base them around. You can't have beliefs by not having beliefs. That's akin to doing by not doing. Atheism, in my mind at least, is just a more complicated way of saying that you have no religion.

It holds its place in a topic of religion to show that not everybody necessarily has one. In the ice cream example; if you can back up why you dislike ice cream, you have established your position in that conversation.

Edit: Biased isn't really the right word for it, but an opposing view, if backed up, still has a place. You can't deny it because you don't like it.


----------



## RoMee (Apr 9, 2011)

cruddybuddy said:
			
		

> Well, my comment wasn't even about atheism. Someone was trying to argue that atheism is not a religion. I was merely pointing out that the very act of replying that one is an atheist in a thread about religious sort of defeats the claim that atheism is not a religion. Why don't we all post our favorite toothpaste brand too while we're at it!




so by replying to this thread, it makes Atheism a religion??? well hotdog!! I want my tax exempt too..can't let the church have all the fun.

and my favorite toothpaste is colgate

so many christians pirating games, I thought it was a sin


----------



## Sterling (Apr 9, 2011)

I'm a Christian. I believe in the Father, and the Son. Lately, I've been thinking about what this means. It's not that I question my beliefs, but rather re-enforce them. Thinking logically about something I will never understand is too perplexing. Though I do admit that it is fun to try. Besides, what have I got to lose. If when I die I just return to dust and nothing else, I won't care. If I made the wrong choice in belief, well I guess I'll have plenty of time to think.

My friend seems to be agnostic. He claims atheist, but says that he also believes that whatever you believe in happens. So it's up to you to choose between a myriad of options, or absolute happiness, or 40 women virgins. (If I were like that, I would definitely take those 40 virgins in paradise over anything else. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 )

@Nathan Drake: Atheism is an ideology. A belief. Same goes for Prophet's Platonist ideology. Something you personally, and others of a like mind believe in, or lack of belief as it is. The idea of religion in itself is a belief, and the idea of no belief is also technically a belief. No matter which way you look at it, you believe that there is no religion to believe in.


----------



## Shockwind (Apr 9, 2011)

Proud to be an Catholic!


----------



## omgpwn666 (Apr 9, 2011)

I'm a Christian.


----------



## Demonbart (Apr 9, 2011)

I'm atheist. Used to be catholic, but when I was twelve I was like "wait... this whole thing doesn't make sense" and I started thinking more about it and stopped believing.


----------



## Vidboy10 (Apr 9, 2011)

Spoiler



[youtube]Uvz-fYbFN_o[/youtube]



'Nuff said


----------



## naved.islam14 (Apr 9, 2011)

I'm proud to be a Muslim


----------



## FAST6191 (Apr 9, 2011)

Nathan Drake said:
			
		

> I was the one who said it, and stating that I am in a thread regarding religion is saying that I don't actually have a religion. Atheism on its own though, isn't a religion. A religion is belief in a deity of some kind with a system of beliefs to go with it. Atheism defies this by denying a deity figure entirely, thus having no religious beliefs for lack of a figure to base them around. You can't have beliefs by not having beliefs. That's akin to doing by not doing. Atheism, in my mind at least, is just a more complicated way of saying that you have no religion.
> 
> It holds its place in a topic of religion to show that not everybody necessarily has one. In the ice cream example; if you can back up why you dislike ice cream, you have established your position in that conversation.
> 
> Edit: Biased isn't really the right word for it, but an opposing view, if backed up, still has a place. You can't deny it because you don't like it.



Just to be a bastard- some variations on neo paganism also explicitly or effectively denounce supernatural beings/deities (others might actually effectively deify some of the notable entities from Celtic, Norse or Finnish/Estonian folklore)... granted this tends to cause issues when it comes to being classified as a religion by tax or charity law but depending on the person you are speaking to that is somewhat irrelevant (do governments have the ability to call things?). Whether they fall under the banner of atheism is then surely open to debate. Speaking of debate lots with a piece to say on such matters really need to refine their debate skills (not necessarily picking on "circular" debating skills either).

Me- There have been other and better threads for such discussion so I will keep it short- I have many misgivings about many things concerning a great many aspects of religion (I made it a point to read just about every one of major (and many minor) religious works be it actual magic book or some theory based upon/around it) but in the end I have more important things to be getting on with right up to and including things like the question of am I in need of food at this point in time?
If pressed it probably ends up as historically it might have been useful especially in things like the fall of the Roman empire (spreading of literacy after that happened and the like) and quite a bit of Asian and African history but there are a great many detractors then and to this day which renders the whole arrangement less than agreeable (I find some of the split legal systems and resulting arrangements of rights in some Asian countries quite interesting). I might not go so far as to say possession of a religion is a negative in a person but I have yet to find a case of it being an outright positive.

I do however take great delight in winding up any religious types that take pains to engage me on such matters- regarding the people that knock at my door that is one thing but when they (and such things are condoned at higher levels) attempt to apply a measure of psychology, sales techniques or worse high pressure sales techniques and then when they deliberately target those that might be receptive to such techniques or on the flip side use them to retain people or influence things (not attempting to pick on any one thing but a lot of the Roman Catholic policy on things like condoms and AIDS) that does a serious disservice to any civility I might be inclined to show.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJynygnjMC0...eEg&index=3


----------



## eosia (Apr 9, 2011)

maybe im the first muslim here ?


----------



## Zorua (Apr 9, 2011)

eosia said:
			
		

> maybe im the first muslim here ?
> 
> 
> QUOTE(naved.islam14 @ Apr 9 2011, 12:39 PM) I'm proud to be a Muslim


----------



## Jasper07 (Apr 9, 2011)

I'm Catholic, dunno why actually, I barely go to church, I don't pray alot etc..
I do believe in God though


----------



## BobTheJoeBob (Apr 9, 2011)

I'm a Muslim. Also, shouldn't this thread have a poll?


----------



## Paarish (Apr 9, 2011)

I'm Hindu


----------



## Jax (Apr 9, 2011)

Jedi.


----------



## Zorua (Apr 9, 2011)

30084pm said:
			
		

> I'm Hindu
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Sith. LETS FIGHT!


----------



## Sausage Head (Apr 9, 2011)

Atheist, no religions make sense to me.


----------



## Cloak519 (Apr 9, 2011)

Agnostic, I guess.


----------



## OmarGudnyz (Apr 9, 2011)

I believe in the Dot...


----------



## CrimzonEyed (Apr 9, 2011)

[censored]/kid [censored], murderer, children that dies at birth, war, greed, torture and so on....
Q: Do you believe in a god?
A: No.

Q: Do you believe in the occult?
A: Somewhat.

Q: Do you think there is a Satan?
A: No.

Q: Do you believe in supernaturality?
A: Yes

Q: Do you believe in science?
A: Yes, but science is limited to the nature of the human.

EDIT: since when did we get a censor filter? =O


----------



## MeritsAlone (Apr 9, 2011)

I dont remember the word but it was between Atheist and those religions that believe in god.
Unless someone proves indefinetely that there is a god, and by prove i mean that either a real angel or god himself shows them selves to me, im stuck here. 
Otherwise Atheist.


----------



## GreatCrippler (Apr 9, 2011)

Agnostic... Yes, it means I am indecisive, and refuse to narrow down a belief structure. The long and short of it is that as mere dumb mortals we know jack crap about the universe beyond our own narrow little view. I think faith is great, as it gives people something to believe in, and hope that they fit into the grand scheme of the universe thanks to dad, mom, or a whole host of other words used to describe their "god" or "gods." In the end, I have always found that religion exists solely as a power grab within a community of one sort or another. That doesn't make religion bad by design, just different from how I kinda like to see faith on the whole. I suppose that's enough rambling.


----------



## spotanjo3 (Apr 9, 2011)

klim28 said:
			
		

> Roman Catholic... and very proud to be one.
> 
> Hi, Can you explain to me why you are proud to be one ? I have seen Roman Catholic broken God's law:
> 
> ...



Hope it helps you.


----------



## Maz7006 (Apr 9, 2011)

Agnostic 

i believe there is something out there, yet im too ignorant to be scared of it

i come from both a Christian and Islamic background if it means anything - yeah i know its complicated.


----------



## Deleted_171835 (Apr 9, 2011)

I believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster.


----------



## DeathStrudel (Apr 9, 2011)

@RockmanForte
Nice try but I highly doubt he will listen. This thing about religion that pisses me off the most is when religious people think you should be a part of they're religion, but they would never even consider converting to a different religion. It's the epitome of being closed minded. I have no problem with religious people as long as they don't try to push they're beliefs on me. If you hadn't guessed I'm an atheist. The only possibility of a god that I can see possible is one that set the universe in motion and let it run on its own. If there is a god, it certainly doesn't care about you out of the billions of humans that occupy our planet that is uncomprehendingly small in the grand scheme of the universe.

Also to everyone saying they're Buddhist, it's hard to believe that you really are when you consider Buddhism a religion in the first place. You seem like posers that think Buddhism is "cool" but don't actually listen to it's teachings. Sorry if my impression is wrong, but I think this because people who know little about it often refer to it as a religion when it's actually a philosophy on life. You could be a Buddhist Christian if you wanted to be. I myself am a Buddhist, but am without a religion.


----------



## Lacius (Apr 9, 2011)

Atheist.


----------



## SilentRevolt (Apr 9, 2011)

I am a muslim.


----------



## shortz1994 (Apr 9, 2011)

crimson eye and great clippers in my view your both right.
i've dabbled in all religion, from the big A word. to going to a minanite.(wifes parents). anarchy. dumb if they had it their way, we wold all be dead. the whole eye for an eye thing just doesn't work.
To all religions. the whole world is going to "the place under our feet". in one way or  another we all worship some, sort of idol, i.e money, parents, cars, game system, american idol" .
we all lie, i'm pushing 40, so yea we all lie, in one form or another. 
if we don't believe, in" your religion here" we are going to "the place under our feet".
so my view is there is no religion, no one has it right/wrong.. it's just "your religions" point of views of history or the unexplainable, some thing happened in the past, before"scientific" research. an the only way for our ancestors, could say what happened was to" make a story". 
i do believe we EVOLVED.  an we still are. there is life in space. an when we meet them they will believe in their own god.  an own beliefs. so when we do meet them i guess they will go to "the place under our feet". because of "your religions" .  so have an open mind. as all religion should. thats all i'm saying. "peace"


----------



## antwill (Apr 9, 2011)

RockmanForte said:
			
		

> You shall follow Bible book and not those churches.


So he should stone [censored] victims? The bible contradicts itself and it's not like they're even true stories, it's mostly just moral stories. Or do people honestly believe Noah built an arc still? Then again it was written hundreds of years after the events supposedly happened after being passed down from generations of people who didn't know how to write. And then was edited so many times...

EDIT: I see what CrimzonEyed was talking about when he mentioned that filter now...


----------



## DeathStrudel (Apr 9, 2011)

shortz1994 said:
			
		

> *the big A word*.. thats dumb if they had it their way, we wold all be dead. the whole eye for an eye thing just doesn't work.


Are you referring to atheism? Because it's dumb for you to think that all atheists believe in "an eye for an eye". So really if atheists "had their way", we would not all be dead. The same way Christianity is split into different sects, different atheists have different world views. I wouldn't even consider someone an atheist if they think others should follow they're beliefs, that's more of a godless religion.

BTW I'm not trying to be a jerk, and I have no fault with the rest of your post, it just seems that you have a distorted view on what an atheist is.


----------



## The Catboy (Apr 9, 2011)

antwill said:
			
		

> Or do people honestly believe Noah built an arc still?


Now I don't believe in the Arc, but oddly enough there is evidence of The Great Flood, one being how many groups of people who all have very similar stories about a great flood happening. Not saying that can confirm that there was one, but it does beg for an explanation how so many people who have never met could possibly all share such similar stories.


----------



## Chhotu uttam (Apr 9, 2011)

Zorua said:
			
		

> 30084pm said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I am a hindu too.


But now we all follow only one relegion and that is the GBATEMP(U)


Hey its sounds great too GBATEMPU


----------



## DeathStrudel (Apr 9, 2011)

A Gay Little Catboy said:
			
		

> antwill said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


They're ancestors could have met and shared the stories? Though I wouldn't be surprised if some sort of great flood did occur, just not to the extent portrayed in the bible and it would have been naturally occurring, not an act of god.


----------



## evandixon (Apr 9, 2011)

Christianity.

Oh, and be carefull with this thread.  I made the mistake of starting a thread like this over at GamingBase.net when it was alive, and it became the biggest flame war that forum ever saw.
(It being offline has nothing to do with that thread, if you actually go there.)


----------



## The Catboy (Apr 9, 2011)

DeathStrudel said:
			
		

> A Gay Little Catboy said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I did not say it was anything religion really, just an interesting little detail that quite possibly a great flood did happen, most likely it's a shared story after the ice age when everything started to melt, that would indeed cause the water levels to rise. Who knows.


----------



## antwill (Apr 9, 2011)

A Gay Little Catboy said:
			
		

> antwill said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


There's also evidence of evolution, what's your point? Also I do know people who honestly believe that there was an ark, which leads you to wonder, how did Noah fit millions of animals on an ark in the first place? Also the National Geographic claims the flood could have been 'quite mild' and there are many theories at a tsunami was the origin of this myth.


----------



## MFDC12 (Apr 9, 2011)

RockmanForte said:
			
		

> .....



nice quotes and all, but all of the OT quotes are not really applicable. catholic church teaches that the NT is what they are to follow, not the OT (new covenant, old covenant, etc), im not good at explaining. that does not stop people from quoting them in protests and such.

anyways... im agnostic, i guess. grew up catholic, went to catholic school all my life. i don't mind that (the public schools here SUCK). funny thing is i also used to be an atheist, but then i realized no matter how hard anyone tries, no one can ever prove or disprove a god.


----------



## Tanas (Apr 9, 2011)

Atheist, due to there being zero lack of evidence of god existence.


----------



## antwill (Apr 9, 2011)

Tanas said:
			
		

> Atheist, due to there being zero lack of evidence of god existence.


You might want to rewrite this statement again. "Zero lack of evidence" if there's no lack of evidence, surely you're saying there is evidence...


----------



## spotanjo3 (Apr 9, 2011)

Wow, some of you are ignorant about God and most of scriptures in the bible. I said, most of scriptures because some of it are misinterprets in the bible, beware. Anyway, I feel sorry for some of you. One day.. Just wait one day then you will regret. That's the voice of the Holy Spirit and you shouldn't ignore it. I guess it keeps going around and around and around. There is no beginning and there is no end.


----------



## Tanas (Apr 9, 2011)

RockmanForte said:
			
		

> Wow, some of you are ignorant about God and most of scriptures in the bible. I said, most of scriptures because some of it are misinterprets in the bible, beware. Anyway, I feel sorry for some of you. One day.. Just wait one day then you will regret. That's the voice of the Holy Spirit and you shouldn't ignore it. I guess it keeps going around and around and around. There is no beginning and there is no end.


Your saying that i deserve to burn in hell because I dont believe in an imaginary man in the sky, you are one seriously  fucked up individual.
So far this thread has remained quite civil then someone like you comes along.


----------



## Yuan (Apr 9, 2011)

I believe in God and in Yahshua (dubbed Jesus by the romans). That's it.


----------



## spotanjo3 (Apr 9, 2011)

Tanas said:
			
		

> RockmanForte said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Sorry.. there is no hell. Check the bible again. Wow, you learn from wrong church or people about the hell. There is no hell according to the bible. By the way, you are horrible person and heartless. Your swear is unacceptable. I feel sorry for you.

EDIT: Save your message. I am not going to read it, thanks. It is going nowhere.


----------



## antwill (Apr 9, 2011)

RockmanForte said:
			
		

> -snip-
> That's the voice of the Holy Spirit and you shouldn't ignore it. I guess it keeps going around and around and around. There is no beginning and there is no end.


And I respect your opinion even though I may not agree with it, however don't go trying to shove it down people's throats please. I'll bite though, what exactly will I regret? IF and this is a big if, God gave us free will, why does he feel so angry that people are exercising it by choosing to not believe in him? Or is that whole "you don't believe in God, you goto an imaginary inferno known as 'hell'." All just a fear tactic to scare little kids straight?


----------



## Tanas (Apr 9, 2011)

RockmanForte said:
			
		

> -snip-


Ok I apologise for what I called you, but  if hell doesnt exist and you have no proof that heaven exsist, then then why feel sorry for atheists? what is this thing we should be worried about?


----------



## antwill (Apr 9, 2011)

Tanas said:
			
		

> RockmanForte said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Dude you got trolled pretty badly. Of course hell is in the bible...


----------



## Tanas (Apr 9, 2011)

antwill said:
			
		

> RockmanForte said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I know that hell is in the bible, and it was Jesus himself who first let us know of its existence.


----------



## Infinite Zero (Apr 9, 2011)

Christian. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



I've seen threads like these before 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 hope it doesn't turn into a massive flaming thread. -_-


----------



## DragorianSword (Apr 9, 2011)

I don't think there is a God.
And if God does exist I doubt he intended to create us.

So I'm not really an atheist. 
I think people can believe what they want, but decisions have to be made morally and not in favor of your religion.


----------



## KingVamp (Apr 9, 2011)

Beertje111 said:
			
		

> I don't think there is a God.
> And if God does exist I doubt he intended to create us.
> 
> So I'm not really an atheist.
> I think people can believe what they want, but decisions have to be made morally and not in favor of your religion.


Why wouldn't he intended to create us?


----------



## .Chris (Apr 9, 2011)

RoMee said:
			
		

> so many christians pirating games, I thought it was a sin








I know a few friends, that are also Catholic, that pirate games!


----------



## Tanas (Apr 9, 2011)

RoboticBuddy said:
			
		

> RoMee said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


They're all going to burn in hell just like the rest of us sinners and they know it...


----------



## CrimzonEyed (Apr 9, 2011)

Can anyone here mention something good that ever have come from religion ?


----------



## machomuu (Apr 9, 2011)

CrimzonEyed said:
			
		

> Can anyone here mention something good that ever have come from religion ?


Cowboy Bebop: The Movie.


----------



## Tanas (Apr 9, 2011)

machomuu said:
			
		

> CrimzonEyed said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And not forgetting "The life of Brian"


----------



## chyyran (Apr 9, 2011)

I'm an


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 9, 2011)

Tanas said:
			
		

> I know that hell is in the bible, and it was Jesus himself who first let us know of its existence.


Hell exists in the terms of the grave, but not in the sense of eternal damnation in hellfire.


----------



## AlanJohn (Apr 9, 2011)

Honestly, I have no idea what religion I am.


----------



## Narayan (Apr 9, 2011)

I'm registered as Catholic since all my relatives are, but personally i don't believe in religion. but i don't oppose it and i understand why other people cling to religion.


----------



## ZAFDeltaForce (Apr 9, 2011)

I'm a Christian... Not a very staunch one though


----------



## kupo3000 (Apr 9, 2011)

Atheist. Well technically I'm still registered as catholic but I don't care anymore. Reading the bible, researching comparative religion and basic science made me an atheist.


----------



## Langin (Apr 9, 2011)

Well I am kinda Cristian, sort of. I don´t believe in god.


----------



## Dter ic (Apr 9, 2011)

Lightning said:
			
		

> Well I am kinda Cristian, sort of. I don´t believe in god.


so then your not christan.... (whats the point?) 

me im christian


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Apr 9, 2011)

CrimzonEyed said:
			
		

> Q: Do you believe in science?
> A: Yes, but science is limited to the nature of the human.Just to clarify, science isn't a system based on "beliefs." It's a system based on empirical data, leading to theories based on evidence. It's not a "I'm pretty sure this is logical and therefore correct."
> 
> And it's not limited to human nature, in the sense that I'm thinking of. Let me explain. We've got five senses, none of which are trained/adapted/mutated enough to understand the "nature of nature." Therefore, we build machines to do a better job than we ever could. We supply the brainpower to think of theories, build better machines, and supply facts to aid the future. And it's obvious, of course, that we also "get our hands dirty" and physically study our universe without machines sometimes. But the point is, we build machines for a specific job, so we get more accurate data, to create more accurate predictions.
> ...


Atheism is not an ideology. Atheism is not a belief. Atheism is not a religion.

Why? Well, of course it's because an atheist has no beliefs. Atheists are devoid of beliefs and ideologies pursuing the supernatural. It's not an "idea of having no beliefs," it's the action of rejecting something that has no evidence _for or against_ it. 

Saying a lack of beliefs is technically a belief is as logical as saying that an absolute vacuum technically has something in it. It's just illogical and untrue.


----------



## Blood Fetish (Apr 9, 2011)

Definitely atheist.


----------



## Advi (Apr 9, 2011)

i'm not religious and rarely think about it. probably agnostic if i had to choose, seeing as i blatantly don't care; i generally dislike angsty brats that denounce religion as a whole more than those who shove it down throats.

also: atheism is a religion in the same way that bald is a hair color.


----------



## Blood Fetish (Apr 9, 2011)

Apathy is cool. Or not. Whatever, man.


----------



## CarbonX13 (Apr 9, 2011)

DeathStrudel said:
			
		

> Also to everyone saying they're Buddhist, it's hard to believe that you really are when you consider Buddhism a religion in the first place. You seem like posers that think Buddhism is "cool" but don't actually listen to it's teachings. Sorry if my impression is wrong, but I think this because people who know little about it often refer to it as a religion when it's actually a philosophy on life. You could be a Buddhist Christian if you wanted to be. I myself am a Buddhist, but am without a religion.


If you've come to the fact that Buddhism isn't a religion, you obviously have no knowledge to the Buddhist religion whatsoever. Buddhism is split into many different sectors, each focusing on a different standpoint. The basic idea of Buddhism is to achieve the 'nirvana' state, or to become a Buddha, and leave the realm of suffering in which we are in right now. Buddhists will use forms of meditation, chanting, and other ways to calm the mind, and at the same time aim for the goal to nirvana once they die in their present lifetime. Just like the Christians in which they wish to go to Heaven, Buddhists wish to leave the Six Realms of Suffering, and follow the path of the religion's founder.

You are obviously the one that know little about Buddhism if you don't consider it a religion. The Buddha preached many philosophical aspects to his followers to assist them in leaving the Six Realms of Suffering. This does not make Buddhism a philosophy on life, because Buddhists are aiming for something after their death. Confucianism would be an example of a philosophy, since Confucius only preached on morality, and how to live as a human being, without touching areas on areas before and after your specific lifetime, thus making it more a philosophy than a religion.

Your view on "Buddhists as posers" obviously just mean you're obstructed to what Buddhism truly is. It's not all about meditation, and to be a good human being. That's the philosophical aspect of Buddhism, but does not cover the religion in its entirety. Why do you think many Buddhists study their many religious texts that were passed down over the years that speak more of Holy Lands outside our world than our world itself? There are so many Buddhist sutras out there that talk about the Heavens, Hells, and the lands of the 'past Buddhas' that obviously a philosophy on life would not cover.


----------



## DrOctapu (Apr 9, 2011)

Prophet said:
			
		

> Nathan Drake said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Your system of belief is hardly comparable to ice cream. I think we tend to come to the threads and post in them because a lot of atheists are happy to convert people and are generally glad they're atheists. Atheists rarely get a chance to express their lack of beliefs, it's really the same reason that atheist magazines and blogs exist.


----------



## DeathStrudel (Apr 9, 2011)

CarbonX13 said:
			
		

> DeathStrudel said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


There are plenty of people who do not consider it a religion. A religion is a system of faith and worship owing any allegiance to a supernatural being or the outward act or form by which men indicate their recognition of the existence of a God or gods having power over their own destiny to whom obedience, service, and honor are due. So, by that definition, it is not a religion. If you're definition of a religion is different then by all means consider it one. I never said only "posers" say it's a religion, just that they often do. Many other Buddhists I've spoken with do not see it as a religion and so they do not refer to it as such
edit: and btw you are the one that "obviously" knows little about buddhism, I'm guessing you got your info off wikipedia or something


----------



## Zetta_x (Apr 9, 2011)

Someone told me that if I did not have the chance to accept God and/or Jesus, I would go to heaven.

Thanks for denying my instant path to heaven.


----------



## CrimzonEyed (Apr 9, 2011)

Zetta_x said:
			
		

> Someone told me that if I did not have the chance to accept God and/or Jesus, I would go to heaven.
> 
> Thanks for denying my instant path to heaven.


There is no heaven


----------



## ManFranceGermany (Apr 9, 2011)

I'm an atheist


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 9, 2011)

Zetta_x said:
			
		

> Someone told me that if I did not have the chance to accept God and/or Jesus, I would go to heaven.
> 
> Thanks for denying my instant path to heaven.


In chritianity? I seriously doubt it. In Islam, yes.


----------



## Nah3DS (Apr 9, 2011)

Iron Maiden is my religion


----------



## Metalik (Apr 9, 2011)

I'm Orthodox Christian


----------



## machomuu (Apr 9, 2011)

I'm still waiting for a scientologist to show up so we can make fun of them...
Uh -I mean...welcome them kindly.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 9, 2011)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> Argentum Vir said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You BELIEVE God/gos/Budha doesn't exist. It is therefor a belief you have. The name of that kinf of belief is Atheism. Ergo, atheism is a belief.


----------



## Blood Fetish (Apr 9, 2011)

That is like saying not believing in unicorns is a belief. Atheists simply want to see some sort of verifiable evidence.


----------



## BobTheJoeBob (Apr 9, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Uncle FEFL said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


As someone has already said in this thread; saying that believing in no god is a belief is like saying Bald is a hair colour.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 9, 2011)

The definition of belief: Mental acceptance of a claim as truth; Something believed
They still BELIEVE It doesn't exist, making it a belief.
Same thing with the Unicorns. I don't believe they exist, therefore it is a belief I have.


----------



## BobTheJoeBob (Apr 9, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> They still BELIEVE It doesn't exist, making it a belief.
> Same thing with the Unicorns. I don't believe they exist, therefore it is a belief I have.


That doesn't make it a religion.......
Using your logic, not believing in unicorns can be considered a religion.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 9, 2011)

BobTheJoeBob said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Who talked about it being a religion?


----------



## BobTheJoeBob (Apr 9, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> BobTheJoeBob said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well then what are you trying to argue?
That it's a belief?
No shit Sherlock.


----------



## DeathStrudel (Apr 9, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> You BELIEVE God/gos/*Budha* doesn't exist


just wanted to mention that a Buddha is not a deity. Buddha simply means "enlightened one." when people refer to THE Buddha they are speaking of the founder of Buddhism, Siddh?rtha Gautama, who was a actual man, not a deity


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 9, 2011)

BobTheJoeBob said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Isn't that what was being argued?


----------



## Blood Fetish (Apr 9, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> The definition of belief: Mental acceptance of a claim as truth; Something believed
> They still BELIEVE It doesn't exist, making it a belief.
> Same thing with the Unicorns. I don't believe they exist, therefore it is a belief I have.


You have very little understanding of the scientific method. Not believing in something does not imply that you *do* believe it is nonexistent. Atheists need evidence before they can consider something. All religions provide no evidence.


----------



## BobTheJoeBob (Apr 9, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> BobTheJoeBob said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I thought we were arguing about it being a religion.
Technically anything is a belief. But the belief that something does not exist isn't a certain belief of it not being there, it's just showing that the person who's not believing requires evidence.


----------



## JakePsycho (Apr 9, 2011)

omgpwn666 said:
			
		

> I'm a Christian.



You say you are a Christian, and yet your name has 666 in it


----------



## RoMee (Apr 9, 2011)

I don't believe in Santa..what religion is that??


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 9, 2011)

RoMee said:
			
		

> I don't believe in Santa..what religion is that??


Asantism


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 9, 2011)

Blood Fetish said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


To say that I presume you researched every religion in the world? No? Isn't THAT the scientific method?
Not believing in something, doesn't that mean the same thing as believing something doesn't exist? Pardon my understanding of the English language, but I think that is called a litotes.
I believe this to be false=I don't believe this to be true.


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Apr 9, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> You BELIEVE God/gos/Budha doesn't exist. It is therefor a belief you have. The name of that kinf of belief is Atheism. Ergo, atheism is a belief.
> 
> 
> QUOTEThat it's a belief?
> No shit Sherlock.



Since you both aren't listening to me, instead turn yourself to Blood Fetish's explanation:

"You have very little understanding of the scientific method. Not believing in something does not imply that you do believe it is nonexistent. Atheists need evidence before they can consider something. All religions provide no evidence."

And, like I said, it's an action of rejection (intellectual or scientific reason to not believe), not believing there is no God/gods (logical disbelief, which I guess can be argued that it is a "belief") just because the idea of a god is illogical.

So, the reason why I think atheism is not a belief is because I'm willing to bet that one-hundred percent of atheists don't believe in God/gods because there is no empirical or even theoretical data for or against its existence. It's usually never a rejection based on logic alone.

And just for the record, atheists don't say "I believe God doesn't exist," they usually say something along the lines of "God doesn't exist because..."


----------



## Nathan Drake (Apr 9, 2011)

The English language can be twisted around in ways that make things that should be simple, complex to understand. You can't believe in not believing something though. You can't not do something. You know, the whole double negative deal is no good. At that rate I might as well be saying I do believe in something, which I clearly do not. You can't not do to do. You can't not believe to believe. It makes no sense and doesn't work.

@pyrmon24
You don't have to heavily research every religion in the world to know that they are 100% based on how much you personally believe in every aspect of it. Because of that, there is no real proof to be found. Even when there is proof (ie: It is known that Jesus was real), nobody can actually prove the supposed actions depicted (ie: Resurrection of Jesus, the deeds he performed, etc.). Religion is about creating a belief system for yourself for whatever reason you may want or need it. Whether there is a basis to picking a religion is based on personal preference and experience.

I do need to correct about atheism though. There is no proof or science needed to prove of God's existence, but rather, a complete disbelief in it. Willing to believe, but wanting scientific proof or the like is basically just being agnostic.


----------



## CrimzonEyed (Apr 9, 2011)

I don't believe in god, give me _*ONE*_ reason to do so... convince me!


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 9, 2011)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> ~snip
> 
> And just for the record, atheists don't say "I believe God doesn't exist," *they usually say something along the lines of "God doesn't exist because..."*
> Just the same way believers say "God exists because..."
> ...



I just think that you would need to actually study a religious scripture BEFORE saying it is complete bullshit. And I don't mean googling it. I mean reading it.


----------



## Ace Overclocked (Apr 9, 2011)

im a muslim and peoud to be one
unfortunately people misunderstand islam and think its terrorism


----------



## Blood Fetish (Apr 9, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Just the same way believers say "God exists because..."


Believers do not say that, because they do not have any evidence to state after the "because" in that sentence.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 9, 2011)

Blood Fetish said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Abusive generalization. A whole lot of believers have stuff to say after the because.


----------



## Blaze163 (Apr 9, 2011)

Personally I take a scientific approach. I think the Gaia theory is about closest to the mark but it's still full of holes. But then when we die, the chemical energy of our bodies is broken down and stored in the ground until it's absorbed by plants, which are eaten by animals, which are generally eaten by humans, powering the reproductive process, therefore we are reincarnated in one way. Whether or not we retain past life memories or the exact nature of what we call the 'soul' is wisdom far beyond me. And I'd prefer it to stay that way. I get the feeling that knowing the exact nature of the universe would detract from the adventure of surviving it, spoiling the innocence of it all. If there is an afterlife of eternal paradise, I'd not be able to fully appreciate the joys here in life. If there isn't and we just die and vanish, I doubt I'd be able to cope with the futility of it all. The only way I maintain a balance is by living in blissful ignorance.

As for the notion of a 'god', I'm not fussed either way. If there is, woop-de-doo. He hasn't been on my side all that much so I don't really care. If not, then no harm no foul. I prefer to find divinity in reality, normally in the form of a good friend. To me they serve the same purpose, only better. With a good friend at my side I'm as inspired and happy as I would be with a religion giving my life meaning, but friends are truly there for you when you need them. I seriously doubt a priest would join your side if you were in a serious life threatening situation, he'd just say that God moves in mysterious ways, and that I'll be with him soon. To me my friends are more worthy of worship than anything that any religion has ever tried to ram down my throat.

My advice is to concentrate on this life. Worry about the next life when you get there.


----------



## Blood Fetish (Apr 9, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Blood Fetish said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Not verifiable evidence. They say things like, "The beauty of nature."


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 9, 2011)

Blaze163 said:
			
		

> My advice is to concentrate on this life. Worry about the next life when you get there.
> Agreed. And, anyways, in most religions, you get to heaven if you do good while alive. So that advice applies to everyone.
> 
> 
> ...


Generalization, again. 
I have been in religious debates with Muslims before, and they have very good arguments that are quite hard to break.


----------



## Nujui (Apr 9, 2011)

Off Topic: Will you people just stop arguing.


On Topic: I believe in agnosticism.


----------



## KingVamp (Apr 9, 2011)

Blood Fetish said:
			
		

> Not verifiable evidence. They say things like, "The beauty of nature."


What are you talking about? I see people on here pulling stuff from the bible like it was on the back of their hand.


----------



## Blood Fetish (Apr 9, 2011)

KingVamp said:
			
		

> What are you talking about? I see people on here pulling stuff from the bible like it was on the back of their hand.


"Using the Bible to prove God exists is a lot like using the Harry Potter books to prove Hogwarts is a real school."


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 9, 2011)

Duskye said:
			
		

> Off Topic: Will you people just stop arguing.
> 
> 
> On Topic: I believe in agnosticism.
> ...


If the Bible wasn't contradicting itself and if it was compatible with our knowledge of modern science, it would be the source of many valid arguments.


----------



## Nathan Drake (Apr 9, 2011)

KingVamp said:
			
		

> Blood Fetish said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Provide some kind of proof to back that up, or else you may start naming names, and people will start arguing. Then the thread gets locked to once again prove that nobody can have a serious conversation on this forum without the thread being destroyed.

The debate I've seen though is fun. I like seeing opposing views and then just the general religion people have. Would be a shame if this thread was discarded.


----------



## Nujui (Apr 9, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Duskye said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I know, that's why I sort of hate it when people make topics about religion, people are gonna start arguing no matter what.


----------



## KingVamp (Apr 9, 2011)

Blood Fetish said:
			
		

> KingVamp said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Funny 'cause I can say the same thing about "proof" that God doesn't exists. 

Just because you do not see it, doesn't mean a thing doesn't exist.

I'm just having a conversation.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 9, 2011)

Duskye said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Arguing and debates are fun, don't you think so? They make it possible to see new points of view and such.


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Apr 9, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Just the same way believers say "God exists because..."
> No one can know for sure, so both sides act on belief alone. Whatever evidence they give isn't 100% proof. Therefore, Atheism is a BELIEF. Because they BELIEVE God(or whatever other deity) to not exist. The same way a theist BELIEVES in the existence of such a being, therefore it is his BELIEF. It is the very definition of the word BELIEF. I am not saying that Atheism is a religion, simply that it is something that is believed by people.


Here you go. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			







Spoiler



http://www.atheistfoundation.org.au/articles/atheism-belief
http://www.freethoughtpedia.com/wiki/Is_At...%22belief%22%3F
http://www.alternet.org/belief/148555/is_atheism_a_belief
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism
http://atheism.about.com/od/definitionofat...ismReligion.htm



Anyway, if you're arguing that atheism is a belief in the denotation of the word (number one here) then you can just stop, because in that sense, the word belief is just a synonym for opinion. But look at two, three, and four for the word "belief." Atheism fits in none of those definitions. Atheism is an intelligent opinion, and nothing more.

I guess for the word atheism, with the use of "belief" meaning "opinion," it is a belief, but it in no way of our modern use of the word, even more so with connotations, a "belief."


----------



## Nujui (Apr 9, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Duskye said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yeah, but then people start derailing from the actually topic. I've done so before.


----------



## Nathan Drake (Apr 9, 2011)

KingVamp said:
			
		

> Blood Fetish said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That's the problem though. Atheists can't just believe that it is there when it isn't. You can't see it. You can't touch it. You can't feel it. It is just supposedly there. From a standpoint of somebody who already has little reason to believe, could you understand why people may just completely turn away from the idea of a God?


----------



## Gameking-4 (Apr 9, 2011)

i'm an atheist , don't believe in a supreme being or a god.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 9, 2011)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Wait, belief isn't used as a synonym for opinion in English? Well, that makes sense as to why we are arguing then. Because in French, both words are used interchangeably.


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 9, 2011)

RoMee said:
			
		

> I don't believe in Santa..what religion is that??
> Being older than 10.
> 
> 
> ...


No, it's more like looking on the box of a product to find out who made it.


----------



## Blood Fetish (Apr 9, 2011)

KingVamp said:
			
		

> Funny 'cause I can say the same thing about "proof" that God doesn't exists.
> 
> Just because you do not see it, doesn't mean a thing doesn't exist.
> 
> I'm just having a conversation.


You cannot disprove a negative. It is the responsibility of the person making the claim to support it with evidence.


----------



## CrimzonEyed (Apr 9, 2011)

Meh now I'm tired of this darn thread...
Going to put on my pitch black cloths and prowl in the night to get some fresh air and train.
(no seriously i mean it)

Just wan't to end it with that i don't believe in any of the existing religions.(NONE OF THEM!)


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 9, 2011)

Duskye said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well, then, it would be a good idea to create a debate thread, wouldn't it?


----------



## DeathStrudel (Apr 9, 2011)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> Anyway, if you're arguing that atheism is a belief in the denotation of the word (number one here) then you can just stop, because in that sense, the word belief is just a synonym for opinion. But look at two, three, and four for the word "belief." Atheism fits in none of those definitions. Atheism is an intelligent opinion, and nothing more.


do you know how a dictionary works? you just proved yourself wrong I hope you know


----------



## Nujui (Apr 9, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Duskye said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yeah, it would.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 9, 2011)

When this thread dies, I'll make a debate thread.


----------



## Blood Fetish (Apr 9, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> When this thread dies, I'll make a debate thread.


Here is the problem I see with that. To have a true debate you need two sides providing evidence to support their claims. Religion cannot do that, so it will just devolve into atheists asking for evidence and theists ignoring them.


----------



## LunaWofl (Apr 9, 2011)

I hate athiests, always trying to convert me, like their disbelief in something is suddenly an epiphany or a stroke of genious, at least they dont do it door to door but i digress.

Im not athiest, or even agnostic, that would imply i believe that its possible there is a god, or just havent decided to follow a faith, but i dont want anything to dictate my life, I have my own sense of right and wrong, and I dont need anyone's scare tactics, or past, or morals to guide me.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 9, 2011)

Blood Fetish said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Theists can make very good, valid arguments that do not conflict with modern science. I have seen it happen, I'll see it happen again.


----------



## DeathStrudel (Apr 9, 2011)

Blood Fetish said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think he meant a general debate thread, not just religion


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 9, 2011)

DeathStrudel said:
			
		

> Blood Fetish said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


One thread for several debates? I don't think that'll work. yeah I meant religious debate.


----------



## Blood Fetish (Apr 9, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Theists can make very good, valid arguments that do not conflict with modern science. I have seen it happen, I'll see it happen again.


An argument can be valid without being sound.


----------



## DeathStrudel (Apr 9, 2011)

Blood Fetish said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


umm....not really, the definition of valid is sound


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Apr 9, 2011)

DeathStrudel said:
			
		

> do you know how a dictionary works? you just proved yourself wrong I hope you know


No, I did not actually. There are plenty of definitions of a word, as "belief" shows just by itself. And here in the United States, you should know, we use "belief" as a synonym for "faith," and not "opinion," as it shows in the dictionary. Yet, belief can be both. 

And, just so you know, the dictionary is not the linguistic law of the land, as jargon, slang, colloquialisms, and connotations show. People rule the language. Dictionaries are just a tool we use to provide a logical divide between words.

For example, if I pointed at the color blue and called it "violet," and it caught on with the populace (for whatever reason), the definitions that we know of now would be switched.


----------



## DeathStrudel (Apr 9, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> DeathStrudel said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


oh....my bad


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 9, 2011)

Blood Fetish said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I clearly meant the make sound arguments based on true facts.


----------



## BobTheJoeBob (Apr 9, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> DeathStrudel said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Its happened on this forum before, except in a more organised method.


----------



## DeathStrudel (Apr 9, 2011)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> DeathStrudel said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


in a dictionary, the first definition is the most used one, and the first one for belief is opinion, and you referred to atheism as an opinion, so yes, you did prove yourself wrong


----------



## ShinyLatios (Apr 9, 2011)

I believe in the father of Chuck Norris!

nah, I wouldn't care if there's a god out there. because he won't show himself anyway!


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Apr 9, 2011)

DeathStrudel said:
			
		

> Uncle FEFL said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No it's not. Aside from what I just said about the Americans and how we use the word belief, not every dictionary is the same.


----------



## Blood Fetish (Apr 9, 2011)

DeathStrudel said:
			
		

> Blood Fetish said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Absolutely incorrect.


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 9, 2011)

Blood Fetish said:
			
		

> DeathStrudel said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Even so, just because you can't see something does not mean it isn't there.


----------



## DeathStrudel (Apr 9, 2011)

Blood Fetish said:
			
		

> DeathStrudel said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I looked up valid and it said "sound" so it's entirely correct


----------



## Blood Fetish (Apr 9, 2011)

DeathStrudel said:
			
		

> Blood Fetish said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


How am I expected to have any kind of rational discourse if you refuse to acknowledge even basic critical thinking skills?


----------



## DeathStrudel (Apr 9, 2011)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> *No it's not*. Aside from what I just said about the Americans and how we use the word belief, not every dictionary is the same.


YES IT IS!
And sorry, I didn't realize that you were "the Americans" and know how "the Americans" all use the word belief


----------



## Blood Fetish (Apr 9, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> Blood Fetish said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Just because you cannot see something does not mean it _is_ there. Evidence: otherwise what is the point? Just believe any crazy thing that another person says.


----------



## DeathStrudel (Apr 9, 2011)

Blood Fetish said:
			
		

> DeathStrudel said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


How am I expected to have any kind of rational discourse if you refuse read the fucking dictionary?


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Apr 9, 2011)

Ugh, you're insufferable.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/belief (opinion)

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/belief (confidence or trust in something)


Two completely different definitions, not to mention three-fourths of the sites I visited agree with me over you (Google, Merriam-Webster, Dictionary, and TheFreeDictionary).

Stop being a giant idiot, troll, or both (if possible).


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 9, 2011)

Alright, calm down now. Back to the original topic.
And Blood Fetish, just because you don't agree with someone's view doesn't make them wrong.


----------



## Blood Fetish (Apr 9, 2011)

When something is valid that means it is logically consistent. When something is sound that means it is both valid _and_ the premises are correct. These are different things, and it is disconcerting that you are fighting this so much.


----------



## DeathStrudel (Apr 9, 2011)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> Ugh, you're insufferable.
> 
> http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/belief (opinion)
> 
> ...


words have more than one definition. If a definition of the word belief is opinion then the definition of the word can be opinion no matter how many definitions don't use that word. you should take your own advice.


----------



## Deleted member 473940 (Apr 9, 2011)

As far as for religion goes...
I am a confused guy lol.
Not quite sure what to believe and what not to.
Does that make me an athiest o.O?


----------



## BobTheJoeBob (Apr 9, 2011)

Tanveer said:
			
		

> As far as for religion goes...
> I am a confused guy lol.
> Not quite sure what to believe and what not to.
> Does that make me an athiest o.O?


Makes you more agnostic than atheist.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 9, 2011)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> Ugh, you're insufferable.
> 
> http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/belief (opinion)
> 
> ...


According to those definitions I was right.


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Apr 9, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> According to those definitions I was right.


Which ones? I can only see you being correct if the word "opinion" was stated or implied.

@strudel: I'm done with you, brah.


----------



## DeathStrudel (Apr 9, 2011)

Blood Fetish said:
			
		

> When something is valid that means it is logically consistent. When something is sound that means it is both valid _and_ the premises are correct. These are different things, and it is disconcerting that you are fighting this so much.


sorry, it's only because of youre "Absolutely incorrect" post, because i have certainly seen definitions that define valid as sound as well as saying that they are synonyms, but overall I would say your definition is more correct, I just havent really though about it before


----------



## Sterling (Apr 9, 2011)

Blood Fetish said:
			
		

> When something is valid that means it is logically consistent. When something is sound that means it is both valid _and_ the premises are correct. These are different things, and it is disconcerting that you are fighting this so much.


Yes, in physical terms that is correct. Faith on the other hand is not exact, or a physical manifestation. It's a phenomenon that is deeply seated in many, and cannot be explained. A lot of times it relies much on human nature to spread it's ideas. Does this make belief invalid? No, folly perhaps, but it's validity has yet to be proved or disproved. Since it likely never will be fully explained either, I figure it's something you figure out when you die. Which nobody (unless you believe in Jesus or similar figures) has risen again or ever will.


----------



## DeathStrudel (Apr 9, 2011)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> @strudel: I'm done with you, brah.


lol, I'm bout to go smoke some buds with the boys anyway so peace out


----------



## xtreme1 (Apr 9, 2011)

I love when people have to get the definitions of these words to prove their point with technicalities.


----------



## MEGAMANTROTSKY (Apr 9, 2011)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> DeathStrudel said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I have to agree here. When the word "holocaust" is used, I find that it is used to refer to the historical event. In Merriam-Webster, on the other hand, the first definition is "a sacrifice consumed by fire." This refers to the ancient Greek tradition of burning meat-offerings to their gods.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/...mp;t=1302387989


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 9, 2011)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


An Atheist is confident that God doesn't exist, no?


----------



## joeylamngam (Apr 9, 2011)

tagzard said:
			
		

> Just woundering what your guys religion is. Cause RELIGION RULES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!









This is my religion

and GOD


----------



## Blood Fetish (Apr 9, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> An Atheist is confident that God doesn't exist, no?


An atheist is confident that no verifiable evidence has been given for the existence of god. If some new evidence came out tomorrow then I would consider it, but that is not likely.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 9, 2011)

Blood Fetish said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Then, by extension, he is confident in the non existence of God.


----------



## MEGAMANTROTSKY (Apr 9, 2011)

Blood Fetish said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If you'd allow me, I think Richard Dawkins provides a supplement to your claim: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-dawk...nl_b_32164.html


Spoiler



Contrary to what is sometimes alleged, evolution is a predictive science. If you pick any hitherto unstudied species and subject it to minute scrutiny, any evolutionist will confidently predict that each individual will be observed to do everything in its power, in the particular way of the species - plant, herbivore, carnivore, nectivore or whatever it is - to survive and propagate the DNA that rides inside it. We won't be around long enough to test the prediction but we can say, with great confidence, that if a comet strikes Earth and wipes out the mammals, a new fauna will rise to fill their shoes, just as the mammals filled those of the dinosaurs 65 million years ago. And the range of parts played by the new cast of life's drama will be similar in broad outline, though not in detail, to the roles played by the mammals, and the dinosaurs before them, and the mammal-like reptiles before the dinosaurs. The same rules are predictably being followed, in millions of species all over the globe, and for hundreds of millions of years. Such a general observation requires an entirely different explanatory principle from the anthropic principle that explains one-off events like the origin of life, or the origin of the universe, by luck. That entirely different principle is natural selection.

We explain our existence by a combination of the anthropic principle and Darwin's principle of natural selection. That combination provides a complete and deeply satisfying explanation for everything that we see and know. Not only is the god hypothesis unnecessary. It is spectacularly unparsimonious. Not only do we need no God to explain the universe and life. God stands out in the universe as the most glaring of all superfluous sore thumbs. We cannot, of course, disprove God, just as we can't disprove Thor, fairies, leprechauns and the Flying Spaghetti Monster. But, like those other fantasies that we can't disprove, we can say that God is very very improbable.


----------



## Sterling (Apr 9, 2011)

Blood Fetish said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm not sure it will even be verifiable. Even if it were, what would it take to convert you? If God came to you and gave you your most want desire, would you be able to get others to believe?


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Apr 9, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Uncle FEFL said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Blood Fetish explained it better than I could, so nevahmind.


----------



## joeylamngam (Apr 9, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Blood Fetish said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Well, I guess u could call me an atheist. Because I don't believe there's a God who'll wait for me in heaven, or a Satan in hell...
I follow my own path and try to go by experience


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Apr 9, 2011)

Argentum Vir said:
			
		

> Blood Fetish said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



If this can be answered efficiently, I would at least consider God a probability (more than I do now, which is very, very little):

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?”

--Epicurus


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 9, 2011)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Easy.
God would have made humans with free will so that they would choose for themselves to do evil or to do good. So whatever evil happens that is evil is the fault of humans and has nothing to do with God. He is able and he would, but he promised that he would let humanity make their own choices and that is exactly what he is doing. According to the Qur'an, at least(the only scripture I have available at the moment)


----------



## Zetta_x (Apr 10, 2011)

I have just read through the last 5 pages... so many people are screwing up definitions like what it means for an argument to be valid and sound.

There is a big difference in not believing God because you choose too and because you never had the concept of existential of God.

If you choose not to believe in God, then that's a belief.
If you never grasped the concept of what God is therefore you did not have a chance to accept or deny the existence of God, that is not a belief.

Atheism is the belief that there is not a God. It would be foolish to say a newborn baby is an Atheist because it doesn't accept the idea of God existing.
----
Mathematical perspective, we live in a world where inverses exist. 
The inverse of believing God is not believing God where not having the concept of God is neutrality. Both not believing God and believing God are beliefs and require faith (faith being defined as a belief without evidence). 

So Atheism is a belief, it is as real as Christianity in terms of beliefs, whether or not it is under the religion definition is up to each individual since words are created by ideas not ideas are created by words.


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Apr 10, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> What does it have to do with anything that atheism isn't or is faith?
> It's a misunderstanding of what atheism is. Humans naturally don't like misunderstandings, especially when it's a personal level. Not only that, but it doesn't make sense to call atheism a faith. And I don't know about you, but I like it when things make sense and are correct.
> 
> QUOTEEasy.
> God would have made humans with free will so that they would choose for themselves to do evil or to do good. So whatever evil happens that is evil is the fault of humans and has nothing to do with God. He is able and he would, but he promised that he would let humanity make their own choices and that is exactly what he is doing. According to the Qur'an, at least(the only scripture I have available at the moment)



Heard it before, easily refuted.

God is perfect. It cannot create imperfections, so, humans are actually perfect beings that can do no wrong.

If that doesn't please you:

Free will, in and of itself, does not truly exist where it matters: in God. God is omniscient, so...

If that doesn't please you:

Evil was created before humans (in your argument), so that entire argument is kaput, with reference to my quote.

@Zetta: Your definition of an atheist is wrong, so you're argument is wrong.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 10, 2011)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Why wouldn't God be able to create something that isn't perfect?
Can you clarify your second refutation?
How was Evil created before humans when I just said that it appeared WITH humans?


----------



## Sterling (Apr 10, 2011)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I actually think that God is only omnipotent. All powerful doesn't describe imperfections. Also, he is referred to be compassionate. Which is emotion. Meaning he is imperfect as well. I don't think anyone who is without emotion could comprehend emotion. Dunno.


----------



## Zetta_x (Apr 10, 2011)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> @Zetta: Your definition of an atheist is wrong, so you're argument is wrong.



How is an argument wrong? I was working under the definition that Atheism meant that you do not believe in a God. If you had other things in mind then we simply had different definitions. It doesn't make sense to say one is wrong or one is right. 

I was trying to show the difference between not believing God and not having the idea of what God is therefore how can you believe in God. Those are two totally different things.

If you accept that there is the possibility that there is a God or there is not a God, you have a choice to put faith in believing in God or not to believe in God. Both of them requires faith. It's not my fault your own biased point of view in hindering your thought process.

If you are a baby and have had no possibly way to even conceive the idea of God, then this is different then not believing God.

---

There, I didn't even use atheism


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 10, 2011)

Argentum Vir said:
			
		

> Uncle FEFL said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


He is perfect in the sense that he doesn't make mistakes and doesn't mess up. At least, again, according to the Qur'an I have next to me.


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Apr 10, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Why wouldn't God be able to create something that isn't perfect?
> Can you clarify your second refutation?
> How was Evil created before humans when I just said that it appeared WITH humans?
> 
> ...



An argument can't be wrong these days? What word or phrase do you use to describe an opinion that is false?

No, that's not a correct definition. Atheism isn't even really an "-ism," technically, but anyway, its definition is this: one rejects the idea of a God/gods existing because there is no evidence for it or against it. Atheists do not have faith that a God/gods do not exist.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 10, 2011)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks for the clarification.
If the perfect being wanted to make something imperfect intentionally, would that make said perfect being imperfect? And it could be argued that humans are perfect in their imperfection.
In God's eyes, you make your own choices and you have to deal with what these choices bring you. Even by knowing every single thing about a person and how he will react in a future situation doesn't mean a person doesn't have the choice to do what he wants.
I don't like to argue on the christian side of the story because it is full of holes. On that one, I agree with you. But from the Muslim side, Satan is a being from another race of sentient beings that also possess free will. So Evil appeared with that race. And God didn't make them evil, he made our specie and that unknown specie as sentient beings that could choose their own destinies. Some choose to do Evil.


----------



## Magmorph (Apr 10, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> According to the Qur'an, at least(the only scripture I have available at the moment)


You have access to the internet. 

God created everything knowing what the outcome would be. How is he not responsible for creating evil? If God never created anything there would be no evil.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 10, 2011)

Magmorph said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I have a child and by some unknown means, I learn that child will kill a lot of people. If I don't kill the child, is it my fault the child grew up to be a serial killer?


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 10, 2011)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> God is perfect. It cannot create imperfections, so, humans are actually perfect beings that can do no wrong.
> Imagine you create something fit for purpose. You make a car or something that will always stay in perfect working order. The only condition is that it must use diesel.
> I'm fully aware of this and yet I put petrol (gasoline) in that car and the car is no longer in perfect working order. Is that your fault or my fault?
> 
> ...


Emotion ? imperfection.


----------



## Magmorph (Apr 10, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Magmorph said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's not a very good analogy considering God would have known the outcome of creating humans before they ever existed.

If you knew that creating the child would lead to people being killed, it would be your fault for creating it. You could have created the child to not be a killer.


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Apr 10, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Thanks for the clarification.No problem.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



But that's under the idea that I _didn't_ have the power to stop you. God, theoretically, has the power to stop you whenever it wants. Also, the fact that it has a condition means that it has a flaw, and was therefore not perfect in the first place.


----------



## Sterling (Apr 10, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> Argentum Vir said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


By logic, that's exactly what it means. Emotion is deemed illogical behavior.


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 10, 2011)

Argentum Vir said:
			
		

> ProtoKun7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...








Emotion may cause imperfect creatures to behave irrationally, but that doesn't mean emotion is bad.
If life had no emotion why would it be worth living to begin with?


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Apr 10, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> Argentum Vir said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


To have emotion is imperfection because it is only evidence that a being is biased.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 10, 2011)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


At the base, the world we live in and humans are perfect. What makes them imperfect is the fact they use their power of choice for the wrong things.

How does God hurt people? The way I see it, people hurt other people. God doesn't do anything because he's letting us fly with our own wings, so to speak. And it matters because it means that if you do something evil, you understood the consequences and it was your own choice to do it.

Maybe we have the potential to rid ourselves of evil and to become perfect? God may have created evil by extension, but that doesn't make him evil.


----------



## Sterling (Apr 10, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> At the base, the world we live in and humans are perfect. What makes them imperfect is the fact they use their power of choice for the wrong things.
> 
> How does God hurt people? The way I see it, people hurt other people. God doesn't do anything because he's letting us fly with our own wings, so to speak. And it matters because it means that if you do something evil, you understood the consequences and it was your own choice to do it.
> 
> Maybe we have the potential to rid ourselves of evil and to become perfect? God may have created evil by extension, but that doesn't make him evil.


As humans, we will never be perfect.


----------



## Magmorph (Apr 10, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> At the base, the world we live in and humans are perfect. What makes them imperfect is the fact they use their power of choice for the wrong things.
> 
> How does God hurt people? The way I see it, people hurt other people. God doesn't do anything because he's letting us fly with our own wings, so to speak. And it matters because it means that if you do something evil, you understood the consequences and it was your own choice to do it.
> 
> Maybe we have the potential to rid ourselves of evil and to become perfect? God may have created evil by extension, but that doesn't make him evil.


If humans were perfect they couldn't possibly choose to do the wrong thing. God hurt people by giving them the ability to make the wrong choice.


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Apr 10, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> At the base, the world we live in and humans are perfect. What makes them imperfect is the fact they use their power of choice for the wrong things.
> 
> How does God hurt people? The way I see it, people hurt other people. God doesn't do anything because he's letting us fly with our own wings, so to speak. And it matters because it means that if you do something evil, you understood the consequences and it was your own choice to do it.
> 
> Maybe we have the potential to rid ourselves of evil and to become perfect? God may have created evil by extension, but that doesn't make him evil.



But who allows these wrong things to exist?

God tells you to fight those who are not Muslim in the Qur'an (9:29) http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Contra/ashraf.html

Yeah it does, lol. At least in my opinion, Charles Manson is still a murderer. Hitler was still a murderer. Stalin was a murderer. None of them did any of the real killing, but man, they were in power to stop it, and they didn't. They were the ones who ordered it! God ordered evil to exist, to create a divisive line, a black and white line, between good man and evil man.


----------



## Deleted_171835 (Apr 10, 2011)

This is why we don't have religious threads on GBAtemp.

This thread was created simply for people to post what religion they follow (or if they're an atheist). Now, it's filled with arguments between theists and atheists.

If you guys want to argue about whether God exists or not, go on debate.org.

@Uncle FEFL:
There are contradictions in the Bible, too.
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jim...radictions.html


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Apr 10, 2011)

SoulSnatcher said:
			
		

> This is why we don't have religious threads on GBAtemp.
> 
> This thread was created simply for people to post what religion they follow (or if they're an atheist). Now, it's filled with arguments between theists and atheists.


It's pretty civilized in my opinion. No flaming yet. Pyrmon is pretty cool.

The only one causing some problems was that strudel guy, and that was a completely off-topic discussion about the dictionary.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 10, 2011)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So what if he allows, them? It doesn't make him evil. He lets us do what we want and what we do is our responsibility.
If you read proper translation(or even better, the original in arabic) of the quran, you see it is written to fight BACK unbelievers. Meaning that if you are attacked, you fight back without hesitation.
God uses the evil of humans so that we teach each other a lesson and to judge who is a good person and who isn't. God doesn't directly murder or give the order to murder. He watches us foolishly commit murder, even though he told us not to do it.

@SoulSnatcher It is mostly atheists and agnostics arguing. Not many theists here.


----------



## 431unknown (Apr 10, 2011)

I'm with soulsnatcher, there is no sense in arguing and bitching about someone else's beliefs because your not going to change their mind. As for my religion I believe in a being much like Q on Star Trek TNG. I also believe that our souls carry on in some form. As for a god that is watching over us... I feel if there is one he has much better things to worry about... Like keeping the universe from collapsing in on it self and planets spinning out of control.


----------



## celeron53 (Apr 10, 2011)

My religion revolves around Shaman and Spirits. We call it in English "jingle bells" to each other because all you hear is bells jingling when you go to these Shamanistic events.


----------



## Magmorph (Apr 10, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> So what if he allows, them? It doesn't make him evil. He lets us do what we want and what we do is our responsibility.
> If you read proper translation(or even better, the original in arabic) of the quran, you see it is written to fight BACK unbelievers. Meaning that if you are attacked, you fight back without hesitation.
> God uses the evil of humans so that we teach each other a lesson and to judge who is a good person and who isn't. God doesn't directly murder or give the order to murder. He watches us foolishly commit murder, even though he told us not to do it.
> 
> @SoulSnatcher It is mostly atheists and agnostics arguing. Not many theists here.


The God of the Bible gives the order to murder a number of times and even does it himself. I don't know very much about the God of the Quran.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 10, 2011)

Magmorph said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The reason why I'm not christian and never use the Bible in a debate about religion.


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Apr 10, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> So what if he allows, them? It doesn't make him evil. He lets us do what we want and what we do is our responsibility.
> If you read proper translation(or even better, the original in arabic) of the quran, you see it is written to fight BACK unbelievers. Meaning that if you are attacked, you fight back without hesitation.
> God uses the evil of humans so that we teach each other a lesson and to judge who is a good person and who isn't. God doesn't directly murder or give the order to murder. He watches us foolishly commit murder, even though he told us not to do it.
> 
> @SoulSnatcher It is mostly atheists and agnostics arguing. Not many theists here.



Are you forgetting the quote?

"If he is able, but not willing, then he is malevolent."


----------



## Tanas (Apr 10, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> So what if he allows, them? It doesn't make him evil. He lets us do what we want and what we do is our responsibility.
> If you read proper translation(or even better, the original in arabic) of the quran, you see it is written to fight BACK unbelievers. Meaning that if you are attacked, you fight back without hesitation.
> God uses the evil of humans so that we teach each other a lesson and to judge who is a good person and who isn't. God doesn't directly murder or give the order to murder. He watches us foolishly commit murder, even though he told us not to do it.
> 
> @SoulSnatcher It is mostly atheists and agnostics arguing. Not many theists here.


The god of the bible kill count.
[youtube]IABptlAhyJw[/youtube]


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 10, 2011)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Apr 10, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> He wouldn't let it happen, but he is bound by a promise he made to not influence directly our acts.
> What man-oriented importance? Are you referring to verse 34 of sura 4?
> 
> Can you explain to me why it would make a promise like that? What use does God have if only after you die? Why pray to God?
> ...



Can you explain to me why it would make a promise like that? What use does God have if only after you die? Why pray to God? 

Uh...yes and no. Yes because, well, maybe (I do not know that verse). And no because...I was speaking generally. Women do not seem to have much importance in the Qur'an or in real life.


----------



## Zetta_x (Apr 10, 2011)

I was mistaken, I thought you knew a little bit about formal logic. Reading your posts and your response to me obviously says you only have common sense. Common sense left open to biased thoughts and obvious flaws.

I regret making a second post, because my attempt to refer to formal logic only made you more confused and almost laughable.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 10, 2011)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No flaming. 
Please don't respond to this Uncle.


----------



## KingVamp (Apr 10, 2011)

What was the thread about again?


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 10, 2011)

KingVamp said:
			
		

> What was the thread about again?


Something that wasn't even near as interesting as this.


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Apr 10, 2011)

Zetta_x said:
			
		

> I was mistaken, I thought you knew a little bit about formal logic. Reading your posts and your response to me obviously says you only have common sense. Common sense left open to biased thoughts and obvious flaws.
> 
> I regret making a second post, because my attempt to refer to formal logic only made you more confused and almost laughable.


Well, I guess you, and all of your arrogance I suppose, will regret making this third post.

Look, you are the one that does not understand an actual definition of atheism. Therefore, your logic fails in the sense that your comparison between theists and atheists is wrong. Utterly and absolutely wrong.

I do not believe I ever refuted your baby idea. No one would ever argue with that.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 10, 2011)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> Zetta_x said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Please let the flaming stop and the debate continue.
Zetta X, don't respond. Please.


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Apr 10, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> It's promise he did after the Iblis incident(santan revolting) to Iblis(Satan). Iblis said humans were weak in every aspect. To prove it, he said he would tempt humans into doing evil. To prove Iblis wrong, God made that promise. He wouldn't force humans to do good neither would he force them to do evil. He would provide guidelines and it would be the humans choice to follow these or not. Those who follow them get a reward, those who don't will share Iblis' fate. That's IIRC.
> Most Muslims aren't good Muslims as described in the Qur'an. In the Qur'an it states that women and men are equal in rights and responsibility. Some don't respect that.
> You're saying the same things a Muslim user said on another forum I frequent. I can't really argue anything because I have never read the Qur'an...plus I know you're correct because the person I'm talking about quoted the Qur'an in English and Arabic (he was very devout). The Qur'an makes more logical sense than any other holy text.
> 
> ...


Sorry, I would have listened to you. I didn't see this edit, though.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 10, 2011)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Why pray: Praying(like the Muslims do five times a day) is a way to connect with God for a brief moment. It is also a way to ensure good hygiene in all the Muslims lifestyles.
Why I believe: I never mentioned I was Muslim did I? I don't really believe in anything. But I research religious scriptures a lot because I find them fascinating.


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Apr 10, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Why pray: Praying(like the Muslims do five times a day) is a way to connect with God for a brief moment. It is also a way to ensure good hygiene in all the Muslims lifestyles.
> Why I believe: I never mentioned I was Muslim did I? I don't really believe in anything. But I research religious scriptures a lot because I find them fascinating.



Uh...you mind starting us off, then? I'm not sure where to start...


----------



## CarbonX13 (Apr 10, 2011)

DeathStrudel said:
			
		

> There are plenty of people who do not consider it a religion. A religion is a system of faith and worship owing any allegiance to a supernatural being or the outward act or form by which men indicate their recognition of the existence of a God or gods having power over their own destiny to whom obedience, service, and honor are due. So, by that definition, it is not a religion. If you're definition of a religion is different then by all means consider it one. I never said only "posers" say it's a religion, just that they often do. Many other Buddhists I've spoken with do not see it as a religion and so they do not refer to it as such
> edit: and btw you are the one that "obviously" knows little about buddhism, I'm guessing you got your info off wikipedia or something


I'm a Buddhist myself,  I have my words in this. The quote 'system of faith and worship owing any allegiance to a supernatural being' is in existence in Buddhism. Buddhists texts have stated repeatedly that there are Holy beings that exist, and that the Buddha, during his lifetime, became one himself. Is this not an example of how Buddhism is a religion? Obviously you're not a very profound Buddhist if you don't even know that the religion is there to honour and worship a Holy figure as well.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 10, 2011)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well, the reason a lot of Muslims believe in the Qur'an is because it makes logical sense. And it has scientific facts, unknown at the time of writing, in it, making it a miracle in itself. Maybe we can start from there?


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Apr 10, 2011)

I'm not really anything. I don't believe in a God or anything like. I'm not Athiest either. I'll accept the fact that people believe in God sure, but for some reason it bugs me when a religious person bashes people who don't believe in that stuff.

Like me and my friends were talking about it, and we said "how can someone NOT believe that evolution is a possibility?" And we just spoke about stuff about it and what not.


----------



## Tanas (Apr 10, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Uncle FEFL said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


What are some of these so called facts?

Myths of the Quran, which includes the miracle of iron, which has been totally debunked.
http://www.mukto-mona.com/Articles/avijit/Quran_miracle.htm


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 10, 2011)

Tanas said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Very bad site you linked there. Whoever wrote that has no idea what he is talking about and I won't even try to explain how wrong he is. Please note I am NOT Muslim and I'm only here to provide straight facts about Islam, so this isn't a close-minded, biased, religious person talking.


----------



## Tanas (Apr 10, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Tanas said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Like most none Muslims, I'm completely ignorant to what scientific facts are contained in the  Quran, so can please educate me in some of these scientific facts?


----------



## Prophet (Apr 10, 2011)

chao1212 said:
			
		

> Prophet said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That urge to convert people sounds a lot like zealotry, something I'd think atheist would try to avoid. I just feel that religious individuals should be able to hold a conversation online with other religious people without atheist cropping up and steering the conversation into an unproductive debate, that frankly, has been argued ad nauseam. We get it, atheists don't believe in god and would prefer no one else did. Nonetheless, every man is sovereign over his own spirit and as such, free to embrace any faith he so chooses.  Go your way and allow others to go their own. You may imagine yourself to be some enlightening force, tasked with revealing the truth to the sheepish God-folk; but I assure you, you are not. As much as it may pain you to hear this, the atheist is superior in no respect to the theist and vice versa. As such, neither is qualified to guide the other. Live and let live.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 10, 2011)

Tanas said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I could easily refute all that is in that link you gave. But it is going to take time. So if you are willing to wait a little, I could do it.


----------



## Sterling (Apr 10, 2011)

I guess I can provide my 2 cents about prayer. Church in my opinion is biased. It's a place where you go to listen to a man speak his mind and interpretation on the Bible. The thing is that it's his. Faith is something every individual needs to find for themselves. Whether that be by works, prayer, or some sort of journey to something physical, or spiritual. Some people come out with questions and some people are content. Most however go unchanged. Until they find their faith, they do not truly believe.

The whole point of prayer is to provide one way of achieving this. Some people find that they can feel the holy presence, and some say they can hear it. The people that claim to have seen God are full of shit.

I'm Christian by the way.


----------



## Tanas (Apr 10, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Tanas said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm not asking you to refute them, I'm asking you to let me know what some of these proven scientific facts are.

Edit: And you're also claiming that you could easily refute everything in the link when you have clearly shown your ignorance of what is actually written in the bible.

Here is a quote from you earlier, which proves my point.
"God uses the evil of humans so that we teach each other a lesson and to judge who is a good person and who isn't. God doesn't directly murder or give the order to murder. He watches us foolishly commit murder, even though he told us not to do it."

So if this is your idea of refuting, I'd give up if I were you.


----------



## scott1982 (Apr 10, 2011)

I'm Christian along with my mother, none of my other family are Christian  (i was babtised when i was little) I have always been proud to be Christian.


----------



## Vulpes Abnocto (Apr 10, 2011)

I'm technically agnostic, but the religion I enjoyed most and made the most sense to me was Pagan (Wiccan-ish)
I liked the concept of "If you're not hurting anybody; go ahead"


----------



## antwill (Apr 10, 2011)

Prophet said:
			
		

> chao1212 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's not true at all. Most couldn't care less what you believe, as long as you're not stuffing it down people's throats. It's the really outspoken and loud ones that ruin it for the rest of us. And before you say anything they have those sorts of people in every religion.
Also: serious question here guys; why is scientology made fun of, but mormonism isn't? They're both as ridiculous as each other. Yet for some reason it seems to be the cool thing to mock people who believe in alien spirits, but when a religion is started by a con-man with equally ridiculous claims it's not?

EDIT: Thanks machomuu, for picking up on that error.


----------



## Shinigami357 (Apr 10, 2011)

Technically I'm a [non-practicing] Seventh Day Adventist, even though I haven't been baptized at all. And, uh, does every religion thread really need to become tl;dr debate threads? Man, that is childish. Peace, folks.


----------



## machomuu (Apr 10, 2011)

antwill said:
			
		

> That's not true at all. Most could care less what you believe, as long as you're not stuffing it down people's throats. It's the really outspoken and loud ones that ruin it for the rest of us. And before you say anything they have those sorts of people in every religion.
> Also: serious question here guys; why is scientology made fun of, but mormonism isn't? They're both as ridiculous as each other. Yet for some reason it seems to be the cool thing to mock people who believe in alien spirits, but when a religion is started by a con-man with equally ridiculous claims it's not?


Off topic: Did you mean "couldn't care less"?  I don't mean to sound like a dick, but if you did then it changes the meaning of the whole statement.


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Apr 10, 2011)

antwill said:
			
		

> Prophet said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Where have you been, dude? Mormonism is Christianity's asshole. ASSHOLE.

Sorry if you're a Mormon, but it's true. You're not as bad as the Westboro Baptist Church though. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UMP3AK5jwo That woman is completely batshit insane.

And you should know I'm joking. About the Mormons.


----------



## Prophet (Apr 10, 2011)

antwill said:
			
		

> Prophet said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That question sounds awfully "outspoken and loud" to me.


----------



## Hells Malice (Apr 10, 2011)

Gamer.



It's a religion, read CAD Comics.


----------



## antwill (Apr 10, 2011)

machomuu said:
			
		

> antwill said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yes I did, thanks for picking up on that, I only just woke up lol. I'll go edit my post so as to not confuse anyone else reading this thread.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 10, 2011)

Tanas said:
			
		

> I'm not asking you to refute them, I'm asking you to let me know what some of these proven scientific facts are.
> 
> Edit: And you're also claiming that you could easily refute everything in the link when you have clearly shown your ignorance of what is actually written in the bible.
> 
> ...


I was never talking about the Bible. And it wasn't refuting anything.
I am refuting all what the site you linked to has on it. It isn't very hard since most of it is bull. By refuting fake claims, I also explain these scientific facts.

Objection 1: They weren't meant to educate our specie, but to provide proof to future generations after these facts were discovered.

Objection 2: As already stated, they weren't meant to educate us faster, so they couldn't be too precise as to make us discover things we would only have discovered naturally much later. 

Objection 3: Allah didn't want to communicate the facts to us, he wanted people who already knew them to read the Qur'an to provide further proof of the divine origin of the Qur'an.

1. Big Bang
The Heaven being talked about here is meant to be understood as Space. It means that everything was mixed and united as one. There wasn't space and there wasn't matter, it was all as one. All the talk about the invisible support is metaphorical and isn't meant to be taken literally. 

2. Expanding Universe
In the original Arabic, this verse is meant as And We have levelled, smoothen the Earth.
Again, when talking about the Heaven, it is a reference to Space and the Universe. In several translations it does say that there is expansion of the heavens. The original Arabic actually means that the heavens are expending.

3. Gas
The verse is talking about when most of the Universe was gaseous. That gas concentrated and formed stars after a certain density was reached. And then planets were formed. As for the part about chronological order, the Arabic word used for “days” is actually meant to be interpreted as “undetermined period of time” and if re-read the verse that way, it makes perfect sense. It isn't placed chronologically.

4. Embriology
Product of wet Earth: Either a metaphor that means something malleable or a reference to the fact we contain a large part of earth materials in us(iron, sodium, etc). The Qur'an stipulates that sperm is produced in the abdomen(between the ribs and the back) which is true.
Hadith=/= religious scripture and have nothing to do in the debate. 
Again, the Qur'an doesn't mention the eggs of the women because it isn't meant to educate us. It stays a little vague.

5. Sun setting
The man saw The Sun set in the direction of a muddy spot. It is a figure of speech. It isn't literal.
The next part is just bullshit. The Qur'an refers to a person's time, in that person's location. It's simple really. If you live in the Arctic circle and you don't know when to make your prayers because the Sun is always there, then just base your prayer times on another country's times.

I could go on but I am feeling tired.


----------



## antwill (Apr 10, 2011)

Prophet said:
			
		

> antwill said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well that's just you. I was merely responding to someones post a few pages back about laughing at a scientologist. And no it's not outspoken or loud either. If you look at it from a logical point of view and just look at the facts of how it started. Also, answer my question please, what is your take on why one is accepted to be mocked openly but the other not?


----------



## Prophet (Apr 10, 2011)

antwill said:
			
		

> Prophet said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'd answer your question if I could, but _I'm_ not a Mormon or a Scientologist so _I_ don't spend time researching, critiquing or thinking about the two perspective faiths. I tend to just mind my _own_ business. I find that to be the most productive way to spend my time; more people should try it.


----------



## Blood Fetish (Apr 10, 2011)

Prophet said:
			
		

> I'd answer your question if I could, but _I'm_ not a Mormon or a Scientologist so _I_ don't spend time researching, critiquing or thinking about the two perspective faiths. I tend to just mind my _own_ business. I find that to be the most productive way to spend my time; more people should try it.


And when a religious person votes away your rights because their holy book tells them to will you still "mind your own business"?


----------



## Sheith (Apr 10, 2011)

...Would it be considered ridiculous if I said I just recently converted to Haruhiism?
Not trying to troll, just being honest.


----------



## machomuu (Apr 10, 2011)

Sheith said:
			
		

> ...Would it be considered ridiculous if I said I just recently converted to Haruhiism?
> Not trying to troll, just being honest.


Well then who is controlling the Earth and its events?  Can't be Haruhi since she's not real.


----------



## Thesolcity (Apr 10, 2011)

Blood Fetish said:
			
		

> Prophet said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You're worried about religion removing your rights? Government already does that by its self.


----------



## CherrySkitty (Apr 10, 2011)

I'm a seventh day adventist o.o


----------



## antwill (Apr 10, 2011)

Thesolcity said:
			
		

> Blood Fetish said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Now ask yourself, how many of them are religious and are doing it based on their own personal beliefs?


----------



## Sterling (Apr 10, 2011)

antwill said:
			
		

> Thesolcity said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Many moral issues are held jointly by many USA inhabitants. In fact, in both parties, there are probably close to equal numbers of religious people.


----------



## Prophet (Apr 10, 2011)

Blood Fetish said:
			
		

> Prophet said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Technically since they would be infringing upon _my_ rights, in attending to this issue I would still be working within the sphere of "my business." Nonetheless, I take your point to be that some institutions are too dangerous to ignore. Here you have a point. However, I would argue that religious institutes are not particularly dangerous. In fact they are relatively benign in the scheme of things. We live in a world where greed and indifference run rampant. I'll start worrying about the dangers of religious institutes when Mormonism becomes the prominent reason that over 16000 children die of hunger and malnutrition every day. Or when a link is established between Scientology and the 27 million people across the globe who are at this very moment trapped in slavery.

In short, your invented religious "boogie-man" that's gunning for my rights, doesn't scare me; I recognize the truth -- Religion isn't the monster, Man is.


----------



## Fellow (Apr 10, 2011)

Agnostic


----------



## Blood Fetish (Apr 10, 2011)

Prophet said:
			
		

> In short, your invented religious "boogie-man" that's gunning for my rights, doesn't scare me; I recognize the truth -- Religion isn't the monster, Man is.


You are correct, and modern religion was invented to control man.


----------



## Paulieo (Apr 10, 2011)

I don't really have a religion, but if I had to pick I would be a new thought practitioner.


----------



## Vulpes Abnocto (Apr 10, 2011)

Paulieo said:
			
		

> I don't really have a religion, but if I had to pick I would be a new thought practitioner.



I don't quite understand. Can you perhaps expand on this label with a definition of what you think, and why you think it?


----------



## Paulieo (Apr 10, 2011)

Vulpes Abnocto said:
			
		

> Paulieo said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/2001/06/Wh...rs-Believe.aspx I took a quiz and this is what I got as my ideal religion and it fits all of my beliefs.


----------



## Blood Fetish (Apr 10, 2011)

Paulieo said:
			
		

> http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/2001/06/Wh...rs-Believe.aspx I took a quiz and this is what I got as my ideal religion and it fits all of my beliefs.


Doesn't that seem backwards to you? Take a quiz, and whichever religion matches your personality the best is the one which is "true"?


----------



## Paulieo (Apr 10, 2011)

Blood Fetish said:
			
		

> Paulieo said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'm not saying it's true I'm just saying that is what I would be if I had to label what I believe. It's not a quiz on your personality, it's a quiz based on what you already believe and then it's matched with what other religions believe. I think it's a good way to decide what you're religion is. If it doesn't match your personality you're gonna hate it and want nothing to do with it. This way it fits what you think and you enjoy it.


----------



## Vulpes Abnocto (Apr 10, 2011)

Blood Fetish: Well it certainly doesn't seem like the _orthodox_ way (pardon the pun) but the paths to wisdom are many and variegated. Maybe he can find what is right for him by a quiz. It's not right for me, but who is to say it's not right for him?


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Apr 10, 2011)

Paulieo said:
			
		

> Blood Fetish said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



There's religious personality tests? 

Uh...I thought the reason for religion was to be closer to God/gods/higher power/yourself, not to take a personality test and see which --probably-- incorrect religion suits your interests.

None of this makes sense to me...


----------



## Paulieo (Apr 10, 2011)

Vulpes Abnocto said:
			
		

> Blood Fetish: Well it certainly doesn't seem like the _orthodox_ way (pardon the pun) but the paths to wisdom are many and variegated. Maybe he can find what is right for him by a quiz. It's not right for me, but who is to say it's not right for him?



I like you....that was the perfect response.


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 10, 2011)

Magmorph said:
			
		

> The God of the Bible gives the order to murder a number of times and even does it himself. I don't know very much about the God of the Quran.


To kill, not to murder. God created life, and it belongs to him, so it's logical that he has the right to take it away. Murder is not the same thing.


----------



## Vulpes Abnocto (Apr 10, 2011)

Very well said PK. If there is a God watching over us all, then that would fall under the "The Lord Giveth and The Lord taketh away" clause.


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 10, 2011)

Vulpes Abnocto said:
			
		

> Very well said PK. If there is a God watching over us all, then that would fall under the "The Lord Giveth and The Lord taketh away" clause.


Indeed, but note that this doesn't suggest that he is responsible for all deaths that occur.

To suggest that God taking away life is murder would be like you building a Lego house and then I come along afterwards and I tell you you aren't allowed to dismantle it. To supplement that, you dismantling that house is also not the only way it can be destroyed. Something else can come along and destroy it without your input.


----------



## Dylan (Apr 10, 2011)

N.W.A is my religion.


----------



## FAST6191 (Apr 10, 2011)

I already went but some things appeared since last post.



			
				antwill said:
			
		

> Also: serious question here guys; why is scientology made fun of, but mormonism isn't? They're both as ridiculous as each other. Yet for some reason it seems to be the cool thing to mock people who believe in alien spirits, but when a religion is started by a con-man with equally ridiculous claims it's not?
> 
> EDIT: Thanks machomuu, for picking up on that error.
> 
> ...


I am assuming by your flag/location you mean Russian orthodox (although there are many Slavic orthodox churches so I apologise if I am wrong here or indeed if you go in for the more general movement that could be called orthodoxy).


----------



## Acetic Orcein (Apr 10, 2011)

Sikh

As a major world religion it's interesting to see that most people have no idea what I'm talking about when I say I'm Sikh, and commonly default me to Hindu/Muslim lol. 

That aside, I wish people would use common sense in combination with their religious beliefs.  I mean being a good person should be universal for everyone... so I don't think that there can ever be a 'right religion'. I guess aslong as everyone has a set of morally good principles that they can believe in, then that's the best thing.


----------



## FAST6191 (Apr 10, 2011)

Acetic Orcein said:
			
		

> Sikh
> 
> As a major world religion it's interesting to see that most people have no idea what I'm talking about when I say I'm Sikh, and commonly default me to Hindu/Muslim lol.
> 
> That aside, I wish people would use common sense in combination with their religious beliefs.  I mean being a good person should be universal for everyone... so I don't think that there can ever be a 'right religion'. I guess aslong as everyone has a set of morally good principles that they can believe in, then that's the best thing.




I must admit I have seen this too. I find it doubly amusing that there are probably fewer followers of Judaism yet "the man on the street" can probably tell you a fair bit about that.


----------



## DrOctapu (Apr 10, 2011)

Blood Fetish said:
			
		

> Paulieo said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Isn't that pretty much how religion works these days? You pick and choose your rules and justify what you agree with.

Also, this video pretty much summarizes my views.


Spoiler



[youtube]HhGuXCuDb1U[/youtube]


----------



## Tanas (Apr 10, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> Magmorph said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So going by your logic, its logical that you have the right to kill your own child because after you did create it?


----------



## antwill (Apr 10, 2011)

Tanas said:
			
		

> ProtoKun7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No God created it...


----------



## Tanas (Apr 10, 2011)

I advice everyone to make one of these, because its always better to be safe than sorry.


Spoiler: This could be a death saver




[youtube]c-mnxKtFhdY[/youtube]


----------



## Jax (Apr 10, 2011)

Tanas said:
			
		

> I advice everyone to make one of these, because its always better to be safe than sorry.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: This could be a death saver
> ...



Or just build one of these already!


Spoiler


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Apr 10, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> Vulpes Abnocto said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


_Well..._ it's KINDA different when you order a genocide don't you think? 

"All these people are bad and deserve my hellfire that I created."

"But what about the babies?"

"HAHA what babies? The slaughter of innocent babes means nothing!"

Just reading the Bible, you soon find out that God is in fact a murderer.


----------



## tagzard (Apr 10, 2011)

geez my topic is pretty popular can someone sticky this?


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 10, 2011)

Tanas said:
			
		

> ProtoKun7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I have read it.


----------



## Blood Fetish (Apr 10, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> God created all life, and he has perfect reasoning


Says who?


----------



## Slyakin (Apr 10, 2011)

Blood Fetish said:
			
		

> ProtoKun7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Says a lot of people on the planet.







 Doesn't mean it's true, but it's all what you think.


----------



## amaro (Apr 10, 2011)

God was created by Man in order to comfort himself.


----------



## Tanas (Apr 10, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> Tanas said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And you still disagree with god of the bible being a murderer, even though you have read facts for yourself?


----------



## DeathStrudel (Apr 10, 2011)

tagzard said:
			
		

> geez my topic is causing lots of ridiculous arguments that are going nowhere can someone close this?


fix'd


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 10, 2011)

Tanas said:
			
		

> And you still disagree with god of the bible being a murderer, even though you have read facts for yourself?


Like I said, there's a difference between killing and murder. Who are we to try and judge God by human standards? That's backwards.


----------



## Blood Fetish (Apr 10, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> Tanas said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


By that logic, who are you to try and judge god's intentions in the bible? That's backwards.


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 10, 2011)

I wasn't judging anyone's intentions.


----------



## Magmorph (Apr 10, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> Tanas said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


God was the one who gave us human standards. If he didn't want us to judge him he could have easily not given them to us.


----------



## Tanas (Apr 10, 2011)

Blood Fetish said:
			
		

> ProtoKun7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It's pointless trying to reason with the likes of him, he's just to far gone, you may as well try and reason with dog shit that you have just trodden in.


----------



## DeathStrudel (Apr 10, 2011)

Tanas said:
			
		

> Blood Fetish said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


He could say the same thing about you. That's why his whole thread is pointless. People rarely change their points of view, so why have a thread that is just pointless arguments that aren't going to be resolved?


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Apr 10, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> Of course not. Last time I checked I'm not God. How would that show respect to the person that gave me life in the first place? God created all life, and he has perfect reasoning, while I don't. The killing of my own child would be wrong as I'm not the life giver.
> 
> Would you call sending down your son to die for sins you knew you created "reasonable"? Especially since you know you can solve it any way you want, meaning without some dramatic murder?
> 
> ...



Read it again?


EDIT: Damn, my thousandth post was in a religious topic.


----------



## Blood Fetish (Apr 10, 2011)

DeathStrudel said:
			
		

> He could say the same thing about you. That's why his whole thread is pointless. People rarely change their points of view, so why have a thread that is just pointless arguments that aren't going to be resolved?


Negative. Atheists are looking for evidence. They have not made up their minds based upon nothing. Religious people, on the other hand, purposely reject all presented evidence and cannot be made to reason.


----------



## DeathStrudel (Apr 10, 2011)

Blood Fetish said:
			
		

> DeathStrudel said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


When i said people rarely change their point of view I was referring to religious people and their points of view on religion, I guess I should've been more specific

edit: however I can pretty much guarantee nobody is going to convince any atheists to change their mind in this thread


----------



## Blood Fetish (Apr 10, 2011)

DeathStrudel said:
			
		

> edit: however I can pretty much guarantee nobody is going to convince any atheists to change their mind in this thread


Like I said many times in this thread, present some evidence for the existence of god and I'll consider it. Of course, none of you can so no atheist will be convinced of anything.


----------



## DeathStrudel (Apr 10, 2011)

Blood Fetish said:
			
		

> DeathStrudel said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


exactly! I'm not try to disagree with you, as I am an atheist as well, I'm just saying why go looking for evidence when you know that nobody here has it?


----------



## Necron (Apr 10, 2011)

amaro said:
			
		

> God was created by Man in order to comfort himself.


I can remember this in a philosophy class. So it was like this: "When a human being thinks about a higher entity, that idea, by itself, could not exist (because we are among only humans and no one has seen God). So, who put that idea there? a higher entity. So philosophycally speaking, god exist"
It was something like that. In philosophy a god exist.


----------



## CrimzonEyed (Apr 10, 2011)

If there is a god i will assassinate him...


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Apr 10, 2011)

DeathStrudel said:
			
		

> Blood Fetish said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Why do you continue to post here, if this is your opinion?


----------



## Blood Fetish (Apr 10, 2011)

Necron N.N said:
			
		

> amaro said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Man has never seen a unicorn. Man thinks about unicorns. Therefore, unicorns are real.


----------



## DeathStrudel (Apr 10, 2011)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> DeathStrudel said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Because he knows that he isn't going to be convinced anyways, so why even debate something with somebody else that isn't going to be convinced to change either?


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 10, 2011)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> ProtoKun7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


With perfection includes a perfect sense of justice. When Adam sinned, he lost perfect human life and the only way to repay that debt was to sacrifice another perfect human life. Nothing else would have suited the situation. It's hardly murder when Jesus knew what had to be done before ever coming to Earth. It was his choice and he was willing to go through with it.



I get the feeling this is just going downhill. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 Of course, the moment I say that you'll just say I'm running out of things to say, which I'm not, but it's obvious this is clearly going off the tracks, and there's a brick wall approaching.


----------



## Necron (Apr 10, 2011)

Blood Fetish said:
			
		

> Necron N.N said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Just saying what the teacher told us in that class. Oh, and horses exist and things with horns exists, so you still have a base to star.
And the thread became from "Whats your religion" to "God doesn't exist or prove me wrong" lol


----------



## MFDC12 (Apr 10, 2011)

Necron N.N said:
			
		

> amaro said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



there are so many elements and theories in philosophy that many start to contradict each other.
my philosophy went pretty in depth about god/souls/what have you, and the philosophical arguments against souls/god are pretty convincing, to me at least. however there are some for them that are kind of convincing (qualia being one of them, which i think is the really only convincing argument that a soul exists).

this statement is offtopic: if you have a good phil prof, that class is fucking life changing. you really wont know what to think anymore 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 because of it i no longer truly believe in free will (which the christian god is said to have given us), chance/luck, ghosts, and so many things. how can we even be sure this is real life and not a just dream, and what we seem to dream is not really our life


----------



## DeathStrudel (Apr 10, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> I get the feeling this is just going downhill...it's obvious this is clearly going off the tracks, and there's a brick wall approaching.


This is pretty much exactly what I've been saying


----------



## metal079 (Apr 10, 2011)

im roman  Catholic and proud.


----------



## Necron (Apr 10, 2011)

MFDC12 said:
			
		

> Necron N.N said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yep. Probably the thread should be closed, since the original idea is not in discussion anymore.


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Apr 10, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> Uncle FEFL said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I didn't know God sacrificing his son was "the only way" to administer justice. You said it yourself, who are we to judge God's intentions? Anything that God did would be seen as perfect justice. The killing of its son just doesn't make one bit of sense.

Then just delete the actual substance of this topic--the debate. Just delete all of it and only have the "what religion are you?" part of it.


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 10, 2011)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> I didn't know God sacrificing his son was "the only way" to administer justice. You said it yourself, who are we to judge God's intentions? Anything that God did would be seen as perfect justice. The killing of its son just doesn't make one bit of sense.


How does it not make sense?


----------



## FAST6191 (Apr 10, 2011)

Magmorph said:
			
		

> God was the one who gave us human standards.



Apologies if I am twisting words or you are going a devil's advocate style debating technique but is that so?

Many options here
Prior to the formation of a given religion were there no standards? I might also mention some moral philosophies being inherited from earlier belief structures and division between certain religions over what is what (thinking ten commandments at this stage)
In some flavours of Christianity at least and depending on your chosen interpretation of certain passages- laws of man are respected. (Yes I watched Dogma last night)
Is such a statement not flirting with the much maligned "without religion one is without morals" line of thought.
Evolutionary psychology and/or basic sociology might also have something to say.
Finally the big one- it was hinted at in the first line but the pick and choose nature of many aiming for interpretation of religious works not to mention translation. Also http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YzEs2nj7iZM just because I think it is funny.

Re "Man has never seen a unicorn. Man thinks about unicorns. Therefore, unicorns are real."
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/09/20/unicorn_captured/

I know that is not what you meant and such logic is not ideal (probability usually factors into this) but still.


----------



## The Catboy (Apr 10, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> Uncle FEFL said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


He sent his son down to die. He could have done a million and 1 things with his God powers, but instead he felt the need to kill off his son.


----------



## Necron (Apr 10, 2011)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> I didn't know God sacrificing his son was "the only way" to administer justice. You said it yourself, who are we to judge God's intentions? Anything that God did would be seen as perfect justice. The killing of its son just doesn't make one bit of sense.



When the first men commited sin, the only way to pay the sin was the death.
God didn't sent his son, he offered himself to do that. The plan was to gather all the sins in one man, so they could be forgiven by his death.


----------



## machomuu (Apr 10, 2011)

A Gay Little Catboy said:
			
		

> ProtoKun7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm not going to support nor deny the notion of Jesus sending his son down to die, but does it really need to make sense?  Most things about God don't make sense, so why would it start there?  Personally, I don't believe most of the stuff I read in the bible (I mean, saying God is all good and then having a man spontaneously explode...well, I think you get the point).


----------



## Blood Fetish (Apr 10, 2011)

Necron N.N said:
			
		

> When the first men commited sin, the only way to pay the sin was the death.
> God didn't sent his son, he offered himself to do that. The plan was to gather all the sins in one man, so they could be forgiven by his death.


He's all-powerful. Why not just forgive everyone?


----------



## Necron (Apr 10, 2011)

machomuu said:
			
		

> A Gay Little Catboy said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yep, he could have done that. But when you forgive someone for something he shouldnt have done just like that, he most likely will do it again.
In the bible you can find many things that explain this, but probably, just like many said, you will find it a nonsense.


----------



## spinal_cord (Apr 10, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> Uncle FEFL said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



How on earth would killing your son teach a group of OTHER people a lesson?


----------



## Fear Zoa (Apr 10, 2011)

No arguing will ever get this anywhere......people believe whatever is necessary for them to stay sane.....its different for all of us....thats why there are so many religions...

Human nature won't let us just leave something blank....so we fill in the blank ourselves....whether its with science or religion...

Humans are weak in this fact.....we just can't stay sane with an unknown in our lives it seems


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 10, 2011)

machomuu said:
			
		

> A Gay Little Catboy said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It was to atone for the original sin, not just to teach people a lesson. The sin created a debt that could only be repaid by an equal payment.


----------



## The Catboy (Apr 10, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> The point is, God is perfect and has perfect justice. The fact that we are not only imperfect but in relation, far inferior means that we can't understand everything he does. It's illogical for an imperfect being to believe he knows more or has a more sensible solution than a perfect being.


If God is perfection, should he have not seen our imperfections and fixed them? If he is of perfect justice, should he have not been able to rid the world of evils as easily as a snap of his fingers?


----------



## Blood Fetish (Apr 10, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> The point is, God is perfect and has perfect justice. The fact that we are not only imperfect but in relation, far inferior means that we can't understand everything he does. It's illogical for an imperfect being to believe he knows more or has a more sensible solution than a perfect being.


Perfect says who?


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 10, 2011)

A Gay Little Catboy said:
			
		

> ProtoKun7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


He will. It hasn't happened yet, but now that the debt has been paid, perfection will return. We don't know when, and right now we just have to wait.


----------



## spinal_cord (Apr 10, 2011)

Blood Fetish said:
			
		

> ProtoKun7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Says the people who made him up.


----------



## Necron (Apr 10, 2011)

spinal_cord said:
			
		

> How on earth would killing your son teach a group of OTHER people a lesson?
> Read the bible, that wasnt the reason.
> 
> QUOTE(ProtoKun7 @ Apr 10 2011, 05:19 PM) The point is, God is perfect and has perfect justice. The fact that we are not only imperfect but in relation, far inferior means that we can't understand everything he does. It's illogical for an imperfect being to believe he knows more or has a more sensible solution than a perfect being.


Protokun, I belive, but I find the way youre telling things not the most accurate. I know its true what you are saying, but you cannot use facts with people who doesnt belive them. If you say: God is all powerful, they will reply: says who?


----------



## The Catboy (Apr 10, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> A Gay Little Catboy said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That makes no sense what so ever. What you are implying is God is just sitting up there watching the shit hit the fan and is like "Meh, I deal with it another day."


----------



## Necron (Apr 10, 2011)

A Gay Little Catboy said:
			
		

> ProtoKun7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Again. We need to change by ourselves, not by anyone else (its like when you copy on a test, you pass, but you dont learn a thing)


----------



## Magmorph (Apr 10, 2011)

FAST6191 said:
			
		

> Magmorph said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I was basing that on the assumption that there is a God and that he created humans. I am in the habit of referring to God as if he exists and the actions allegedly preformed by him actually happened. I do not believe that religion gives people morals. Even animals have some form of morals. I often use wolves not using each other as a food source as an example of this.


----------



## machomuu (Apr 10, 2011)

A Gay Little Catboy said:
			
		

> ProtoKun7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's called Deism.


----------



## Blood Fetish (Apr 10, 2011)

The concept of morals is entirely man-made. Animals kill each other all the time. For sport even.


----------



## spinal_cord (Apr 10, 2011)

Necron N.N said:
			
		

> A Gay Little Catboy said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Then what is the point of an omnipotent being, who rules over apparently only one of the billions of billions of planets in the universe, if we have to do everything ourselves?


----------



## KingVamp (Apr 10, 2011)

A Gay Little Catboy said:
			
		

> ProtoKun7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...









 That mess up the way you put it.


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 10, 2011)

Necron N.N said:
			
		

> spinal_cord said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Of course not.

Think of it like a court case. It started off with Satan being convinced that men didn't need God to be content, so he sparked the rebellion. Since then, it's been Satan trying to prove his point. God's given him adequate time to show his side of the argument to see if the allegation was correct and that man didn't need God and could operate independently of him. What God could have done is killed Adam, Eve, Satan and just started again, but it would be conceivable that angels still in existence could begin to have doubts and think that God just killed them immediately because he was worried that they'd defeat him (which wouldn't happen).
What happened instead is what you see now. Still under Satan's rulership, we can see how things on Earth are going right now. Satan's being given time to show his side of the argument, and once his time is up, everything will be restored and there will be no question of the right course of action.

Took me a while to type that.


----------



## machomuu (Apr 10, 2011)

Blood Fetish said:
			
		

> The concept of morals is entirely man-made. Animals kill each other all the time. For sport even.


That's true.  Actually, a good part of my belief is that I am against Human supremacy.  The bible says God created man in his image, I don't believe that.  Do they really expect me to believe that all other animals on Earth were created for humans?  No, we're animals too, I don't know why people refuse the notion.  I believe all lives are equal, Human or otherwise.  I don't believe that just because we "took over the world" we're any better than the other animals.

Just my opinion.


----------



## The Catboy (Apr 10, 2011)

KingVamp said:
			
		

> A Gay Little Catboy said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So what you are saying is, God created us and now is just watching to see what would happen next?


----------



## Necron (Apr 10, 2011)

spinal_cord said:
			
		

> Then what is the point of an omnipotent being, who rules over apparently only one of the billions of billions of planets in the universe, if we have to do everything ourselves?


The point is, that we are out of the original plan. Life should be (thinking as how it should be without original sin):
-Born
-Learn
-Enjoy life
-Work a little
-And may others things you can think

Now, we are out of that kind of life, so while this planet exist like it is, we need to change by ourselves, waiting fot the day to return to that continuity.
God is not our maid. Read the bible to undestand my point (im not saying this to convert you or something, Im saying it for you to see that those questions are already answered)


----------



## Magmorph (Apr 10, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> Of course not.
> 
> Think of it like a court case. It started off with Satan being convinced that men didn't need God to be content, so he sparked the rebellion. Since then, it's been Satan trying to prove his point. God's given him adequate time to show his side of the argument to see if the allegation was correct and that man didn't need God and could operate independently of him. What he could have done is killed Adam, Eve, Satan and just started again, but it would be conceivable that angels still in existence could begin to have doubts and think that God just killed them immediately because he was worried that they'd defeat him (which wouldn't happen).
> What happened instead is what you see now. Still under Satan's rulership, we can see how things on Earth are going right now. Satan's being given time to show his side of the argument, and once his time is up, everything will be restored and there will be no question of the right course of action.
> ...


God made Satan knowing what the outcome of creating him would be. God would already know the outcome of Satan's side of the argument. Time has no meaning to a infinite being.


----------



## Prophet (Apr 10, 2011)

Since when did being an atheist require you to also be an iconoclast?

If I may take a moment to butcher Shakespeare, I can't help but feel that many of the atheists in the thread "doth protest too much." I have a suspicion that a great many of you, on some level, wish to be genuinely convinced that there is in fact a God. If the concept is ridiculous and the believers are by extension ridiculous individuals; then why engage in a discourse that from your own perspective must appear futile? 

I tend to think that maybe some of you aren't entirely content in your atheism. Perhaps you experience a spiritual void at times; an emptiness not address by non-theistic ideologies. And like a child too proud to admit his own insecurity, you enter discussions such as this one, with snide remarks and barbed questions.


----------



## The Catboy (Apr 10, 2011)

Prophet said:
			
		

> Since when did being an atheist require you to also be an iconoclast?
> 
> If I may take a moment to butcher Shakespeare, I can't help but feel that many of the atheists in the thread "doth protest too much." I have a suspicion that a great many of you, on some level, wish to be genuinely convinced that there is in fact a God. If the concept is ridiculous and the believers are by extension ridiculous individuals; then why engage in a discourse that from your own perspective must appear futile?
> 
> I tend to think that maybe some of you aren't entirely content in your atheism. Perhaps you experience a spiritual void at times; an emptiness not address by non-theistic ideologies. And like a child too proud to admit his own insecurity, you enter discussions such as this one, with snide remarks and barbed questions.


I don't know much about the other members here, but I am no Atheist, I don't know what I am, I guess some people would refer to me as an Agnostic, but honest who knows.
Either way, I just feel a good debate is always needed at one point or another.


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 10, 2011)

A Gay Little Catboy said:
			
		

> ProtoKun7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It certainly wouldn't surprise me; humans have an instinctive spritual desire, it's just that many people ignore this desire.


----------



## DeathStrudel (Apr 10, 2011)

Prophet said:
			
		

> Since when did being an atheist require you to also be an iconoclast?
> 
> If I may take a moment to butcher Shakespeare, I can't help but feel that many of the atheists in the thread "doth protest too much." I have a suspicion that a great many of you, on some level, wish to be genuinely convinced that there is in fact a God. If the concept is ridiculous and the believers are by extension ridiculous individuals; then why engage in a discourse that from your own perspective must appear futile?
> 
> I tend to think that maybe some of you aren't entirely content in your atheism. Perhaps you experience a spiritual void at times; an emptiness not address by non-theistic ideologies. And like a child too proud to admit his own insecurity, you enter discussions such as this one, with snide remarks and barbed questions.


I already tried to make a similar point earlier. If you're an atheist, why argue with people who aren't going to change their religious perspective? and why go looking for evidence that you aren't going to find? If there was some sort of tangible evidence that definitively proved there was a god, then I think you would know without having to look for it.
And if you're religious, why would you try to convince people that your religion is correct when I highly doubt you would even consider converting to another religion or become an atheist


----------



## Necron (Apr 10, 2011)

DeathStrudel said:
			
		

> I already tried to make a similar point earlier. If you're an atheist, why argue with people who aren't going to change their religious perspective? and why go looking for evidence that you aren't going to find? If there was some sort of tangible evidence that definitively proved there was a god, then I think you would know without having to look for it.
> And if you're religious, why would you try to convince people that your religion is correct when I highly doubt you would even consider converting to another religion or become an atheist



And more, why to post in this topic. As somebody said in the first post, atheism is not a religion so they are not answering the initial question.
For someone who says: "but I want to express myself too", you can, but the right situation
Its like this: "what your favorite color?" and you say: "its raining"

edit: this sound like "no, you cannot express yourself here", but its not what Im trying to say.


----------



## The Catboy (Apr 10, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> Not quite. Satan was allowed time to prove his point and it's clearly not going so well for him though. He was wrong.


Not to say that I don't believe that, but I just question that idea. As God, more like an immortal, all mighty, all-seeing being, God wouldn't even need to do that. He's perfection as said before, thus meaning he has compete power of that situation and honestly would have already known all this in advance.
I just want to know why God would do all that, it just seems put all that work into something he was just going to let fail first place.


----------



## Magmorph (Apr 10, 2011)

DeathStrudel said:
			
		

> Prophet said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I know people can change their views. It won't necessarily be the people debating but perhaps someone who is reading the debate.

It is also a subject that interests me. Whats wrong with debating it?


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 10, 2011)

DeathStrudel said:
			
		

> I already tried to make a similar point earlier. If you're an atheist, why argue with people who aren't going to change their religious perspective? and why go looking for evidence that you aren't going to find? If there was some sort of tangible evidence that definitively proved there was a god, then I think you would know without having to look for it.


Often the evidence stares people right in the face yet people take it for granted. Not to emulate the "beauty of nature" attitude mentioned earlier, but when you look not only at the intricacies of nature itself, including the functions of different animals and the design of DNA, and conversely the vastness of the universe, the raw power it contains, and the harmony of the celestial bodies (including the exact positioning and conditions of the Earth to support life, you can't just think that it all happened by accident. To do so is just...immeasurably foolish, in want of a better term.


----------



## Necron (Apr 10, 2011)

A Gay Little Catboy said:
			
		

> ProtoKun7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I can agree in this point with you. But, the mechanism of knowing the future is not clearly explained, so I cant really say much. Probably, future changes all the time according with our actions, therefore, God knows what is going to happen if we follow a certain way or another, but this is an assumption.
If it were like that, the life is meaningless, because the future is already known.


----------



## DeathStrudel (Apr 10, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> Often the evidence stares people right in the face yet people take it for granted. Not to emulate the "beauty of nature" attitude mentioned earlier, but when you look not only at the intricacies of nature itself, including the functions of different animals and the design of DNA, and conversely the vastness of the universe, the raw power it contains, and the harmony of the celestial bodies (including the exact positioning and conditions of the Earth to support life, you can't just think that it all happened by accident. To do so is just...immeasurably foolish, in want of a better term.


That is not evidence at all. The Universe in so large we can't even really comprehend it so out of the billions upon billions of planets, the likelihood that at least one would have the conditions that earth has is actually pretty high. I'm sorry, but it seems like you don't have very much scientific knowledge and don't realize that it is entirely possible for things to have happened "by accident" as you put it


----------



## The Catboy (Apr 10, 2011)

Necron N.N said:
			
		

> A Gay Little Catboy said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


To me that would imply that there a flaw in God, a small flaw, but honestly a flaw. That would mean that God is not all knowing.


----------



## ShineroDark (Apr 10, 2011)

Can we just turn this thread into a poll with a bunch of religions? 
Also I'm LDS (Mormon)


----------



## DeathStrudel (Apr 10, 2011)

I'm just gonna leave this here


----------



## KingVamp (Apr 10, 2011)

A Gay Little Catboy said:
			
		

> To me that would imply that there a flaw in God, a small flaw, but honestly a flaw. That would mean that God is not all knowing.


You can't know something going to happen, but something changes it? Would that actually be a flaw if something he knows
change?

Future isn't set in stone. 

Maybe he want to see it not just know?


----------



## Necron (Apr 10, 2011)

A Gay Little Catboy said:
			
		

> Necron N.N said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Funny, in the term that this image just has the thing of general knowledge about Jesus. I can explain it, but it would take a lot of time.


----------



## Sterling (Apr 10, 2011)

Magmorph said:
			
		

> ProtoKun7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No, humans gave humans, human standards. God just created, and said, "Have at it".


----------



## Magmorph (Apr 10, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> DeathStrudel said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


There are many planets a hospitable distance from their stars. Natural selection is very different from an accident and does a very good job of explaining what happened in the past and predicting what will happen in the future.


----------



## The Catboy (Apr 10, 2011)

Necron N.N said:
			
		

> I cant really say, because we dont know many things, but when you said that there is a flaw, I say there is missing info.
> I understand your point, but as I said, the method is not explained (and I dont even know if it is humanly understable) so that assumption may be wrong too.


True, but as I said, I am not here to question God's Will, I just have some questions that just lack answers. Maybe one day I will find the answer to them, but till then I find that these questions ultimately can not be answered by man


----------



## Necron (Apr 10, 2011)

A Gay Little Catboy said:
			
		

> Necron N.N said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I say the same, these things cannot be answered by man. I, as a beliver, have many questions that I cannot find answers and Im hoping to find them some day.


----------



## Magmorph (Apr 10, 2011)

Argentum Vir said:
			
		

> Magmorph said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Like I said before, he created us knowing what we would become. He could have changed the way we were created if he didn't like how human nature turned out.


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 10, 2011)

DeathStrudel said:
			
		

> ProtoKun7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I wasn't saying that to suggest that the only life in the universe is on this planet. I was suggesting that the complexity of the universe; the size, the detail, both big and small, should be proof enough that things didn't just smash together and make it by accident.


----------



## machomuu (Apr 10, 2011)

Magmorph said:
			
		

> Argentum Vir said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Why would God change human nature if he didn't like how it turned out?  God is supposedly Omnipresent, in other words God supposedly exists outside of time.

P.S. I'm not an atheist by the way, I believe in God, but if one is willing to assert something about God I will question them.


----------



## Magmorph (Apr 10, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> DeathStrudel said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The same could be said for a God. He would have to have been even more complex than the universe to create it. I don't think complexity is a valid argument for or against anything though.


----------



## baladamy (Apr 10, 2011)

ROMAN CATHOLIC IS I AND IT IS BEST OF THE!!! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


(i am now praying)
Now for some learning time 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




99.54% of Filipinos are Catholic. The rest are Muslims........ WOOT CATHOLIC!!!!


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 10, 2011)

machomuu said:
			
		

> Why would God change human nature if he didn't like how it turned out?  God is supposedly Omnipresent, in other words God supposedly exists outside of time.


Omnipresence isn't quite the same as existing outside of time.


----------



## Magmorph (Apr 10, 2011)

machomuu said:
			
		

> Why would God change human nature if he didn't like how it turned out?  God is supposedly Omnipresent, in other words God supposedly exists outside of time.
> 
> P.S. I'm not an atheist by the way, I believe in God, but if one is willing to assert something about God I will question them.


Omnipresent means to be everywhere at one. I also don't understand your question.


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 10, 2011)

Magmorph said:
			
		

> The same could be said for a God. He would have to have been even more complex than the universe to create it. I don't think complexity is a valid argument for or against anything though.


He is more complex than the universe, in a way. In fact, humans that live forever would never finish learning everything there is to learn.



Spoiler



Heh, nice, 5,555 posts.


----------



## Sterling (Apr 10, 2011)

Magmorph said:
			
		

> Argentum Vir said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


My theory is that God is all powerful, but not all knowing. He couldn't know that Lucifer would betray him, and once Lucifer fell and became temptation, and caused the consumption of the forbidden fruit he couldn't see past that either. Humans then had the ability to discern right from wrong after that. I guess the way we turned out, God should have destroyed us, but I feel like it's one of those cases where at this point we were his children, and we likely meant a lot to him (Same sort of thing when someone has a baby). In fact the only reason everyone wasn't wiped out when God submerged the earth was because of the devout Noah.


----------



## The Catboy (Apr 10, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Heh, nice, 5,555 posts.





Spoiler



Congratulations on your 5,555th post


----------



## DeathStrudel (Apr 10, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> DeathStrudel said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


But it's still not proof. The universe started out small and became as vast as it is today after billions and billions of years. It is entirely possible for the Universe to have formed the way it is naturally so you really can't say it's not possible or even unlikely, just like I'm not saying that it's impossible that a god created the Universe, I just have no proof. I actually think complexity disproves god more than proves it. If god can do whatever he wants, why would he need to make things so complex? And please don't reply with "god works in mysterious ways" or some bs that pretty much means nothing


----------



## DSGamer64 (Apr 10, 2011)

Religion is the cause of 95% of all wars and the reason why society is being held back from progressing and preventing equality from truly existing, especially in the western world. So long as you have wind bag Evangelists, Christians and Catholics who still think that their archaic beliefs should be the reasons why same sex marriage and things like marijuana use are illegal because of some moral bullshit that they like to pull out of their rear ends. These are also the same people who think it's acceptable to do things like burn other religious texts and abuse little boys as well. It's that kind of crap that makes me despise religions in general, because every single one has their followers who are completely stupid and unreasonable. Where in any religious beliefs does it say that molesting little boys is acceptable? How about murdering hundreds or even thousands of people in the name of your own God? In what religion is there any mention of practising religious and cultural intolerance? These kinds things are not acceptable, regardless of what faith you believe in.

The Bible teaches equality, morality and respecting your fellow man regardless of his station, but some of it's teachings are old beliefs that don't work well in modern society, hence why I think they are holding back society from progressing.

I am not religious because I think it makes people ignorant to the world around them and makes them closed minded.


----------



## Magmorph (Apr 10, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> Magmorph said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If being so complex is an argument against the universe happening by accident, why does the same argument not also apply to God?


----------



## amaro (Apr 10, 2011)

you all are a sinner!


----------



## Necron (Apr 10, 2011)

Argentum Vir said:
			
		

> Magmorph said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


God is all powerful, all knowing and omnipresent. As I said in some post above, we cannot make this kind of assumptions in the things that the Bible says, because the Bible wasnt made to explain the man some things, it is for another purpose, so some information its not there.


----------



## Raiser (Apr 10, 2011)

DSGamer64 said:
			
		

> Religion is the cause of 95% of all wars and the reason why society is being held back from progressing and preventing equality from truly existing, especially in the western world. So long as you have wind bag Evangelists, Christians and Catholics who still think that their archaic beliefs should be the reasons why same sex marriage and things like marijuana use are illegal because of some moral bullshit that they like to pull out of their rear ends. These are also the same people who think it's acceptable to do things like burn other religious texts and abuse little boys as well. It's that kind of crap that makes me despise religions in general, because every single one has their followers who are completely stupid and unreasonable. Where in any religious beliefs does it say that molesting little boys is acceptable? How about murdering hundreds or even thousands of people in the name of your own God? In what religion is there any mention of practising religious and cultural intolerance? These kinds things are not acceptable, regardless of what faith you believe in.
> 
> I am not religious because I think it makes people ignorant to the world around them and makes them close minded.


My sentiments exactly.
I mean, if people need guidance throughout their lives, I'm all for it. But to use their religion as an excuse for everything they do and such just makes me despise religion.

An example of what religion has done to society -> YouTube "Westboro Baptist Church". Not a significant number of people, but just shows how extreme the religious can take it.

In short reply to the topic- "athiest".


----------



## injected11 (Apr 10, 2011)

Argentum Vir said:
			
		

> In fact the only reason everyone wasn't wiped out when God submerged the earth was because of the devout Noah.


I've always wondered about this. How did he get 2 of EVERY creature (from all over the world?) onto a boat, prevent them from killing each other, keep them fed, dispose of the waste, etc by himself? I'm not trying to make jokes, I'm seriously curious as to how this is explained.


----------



## Fishaman P (Apr 10, 2011)

Why wasn't this a poll?

Anyway, I'm an atheist.
All of that talk, writings, etc. about God is bullshit.


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 10, 2011)

A Gay Little Catboy said:
			
		

> ProtoKun7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Even humans can be fascinated by intricate construction projects, or fine detail. People specialise in intricate train models and miniature tracks, so why would God himself not be fascinated by similar things? Think of the universe as his own project; he had infinite ability to make a huge project and be able to pay attention to the minutest detail, even as small as DNA, as I mentioned before.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 10, 2011)

injected11 said:
			
		

> Argentum Vir said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


He didn't. There wasn't a world wide flood. Like, ever.


----------



## amaro (Apr 10, 2011)

Fishaman P said:
			
		

> Why wasn't this a poll?


the title of this thread should be changed to: What's Your Spiritual Type?


----------



## DeathStrudel (Apr 10, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> DeathStrudel said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You're missing the point. I'm not denying that that's possible, I'm just saying that it still in no way proves anything. Just as stars form on their own, life could've formed on it's own; it just started off very small and basic and became more complex over a very very long period of time


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 10, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> He didn't. There wasn't a world wide flood. Like, ever.
> Oh, sorry, I didn't know you were there.
> 
> 
> ...


I was mostly just answering the question you asked about why he made things so complex. Stars and life can form by themselves now, but they were set off originally by God. It's like a chain reaction; once you start the reaction it causes other reactions and is able to sustain itself.


----------



## Necron (Apr 10, 2011)

injected11 said:
			
		

> Argentum Vir said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I can answer that. But you need to supose some things based on faith.
When God said to Noah to make the arc, he gave him some instructions on how to make it. I can't remember now, but it was very very large and big (it took him like 100 years to make it)
God guided the animals to the arc. The thing is, that the animal didn't need to kill each other, because the only ate vegetals and plants at that point(God allowed to eat flesh to the man after the flood)
About the food, probably Noah and his family gathered the food, plus God's help.
Inside the Arc, there were eight people (Noah, his wife, his three sons and their brides) so they must have done all that stuff, probably it took them all the day to do that, but in that time, it is supposed that the human body could endure more than now.

Oh, and probably some animals died too, but I cannot assure this at this point.


----------



## machomuu (Apr 10, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> machomuu said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It's saying that God exists everywhere, how is time excluded.


----------



## Sterling (Apr 10, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


A lot of places have a layer in the ground that suggests that there was indeed a widespread flood.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 10, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> A Gay Little Catboy said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The other way to see it is that it makes him look much more powerful and wise to create the Universe from nothing and add tiny blocks here and there over time than to just poof everything into existence in six days.


----------



## DeathStrudel (Apr 10, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> He didn't. There wasn't a world wide flood. Like, ever.


actually there is evidence suggesting that a great flood did happen, just not to the extent portrayed in the bible, and it was naturally occurring, not caused by god.


----------



## Necron (Apr 10, 2011)

DeathStrudel said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think this in other way. God plan things with time. It happened naturally, triggered by God.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 10, 2011)

Argentum Vir said:
			
		

> ProtoKun7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Widespread flood, OK. But not a global one.


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 10, 2011)

machomuu said:
			
		

> ProtoKun7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That implies that God doesn't have control of the elements. He simply caused it to rain. From the outside observer it would just look like a whole lot of rain, whatever the cause.


----------



## Necron (Apr 10, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Argentum Vir said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It could have been the world at that time, probably a continent.


----------



## DeathStrudel (Apr 10, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> DeathStrudel said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well by what you're saying now, god did not make the Universe complex then, he simply started it and it became complex on it's own

edit: arrrg, I can't believe I'm getting sucked into this bs, lets just agree to disagree, im out


----------



## Necron (Apr 10, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> They weren't six literal 24-hour days, but figurative creative days.
> Sorry Proto, I disagree with you in this. They were six literal days.
> 
> QUOTE(DeathStrudel @ Apr 10 2011, 06:53 PM) Well by what you're saying now, god did not make the Universe complex then, he simply started it and it became complex on it's own


Probaby. You know that thing of eating a fruit? It became very complex on its own.


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 10, 2011)

DeathStrudel said:
			
		

> Well by what you're saying now, god did not make the Universe complex then, he simply started it and it became complex on it's own
> Just because one thing can be a chain reaction, that doesn't mean everything has to be. But of course, I truly don't know how he created the universe, as I wasn't there nor is there currently a lot of detail available to us about how he did it.
> 
> 
> ...


Why is it you say that? When you consider it, the Earth didn't even have the sun or the moon when it was still being created, as they were introduced during the process, and God himself is not restricted by any time limits. To suggest that they were 24-hour days would say that he was measuring the time period of the creating of it before the system used to measure time around the planet had even been put together.


----------



## Fear Zoa (Apr 10, 2011)

.....does any of this even matter? I mean really guys.......


----------



## machomuu (Apr 10, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> machomuu said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


We're talking vice versa.  Also, I don't really see how one would know what it's like to exist outside of time.


----------



## junkerde (Apr 10, 2011)

Fear Zoa said:
			
		

> .....does any of this even matter? I mean really guys.......


they gettin into the debating spirit.


----------



## machomuu (Apr 10, 2011)

junkerde said:
			
		

> Fear Zoa said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Nah, I'm just doing this for fun.  Don't know about the others, though.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 10, 2011)

Necron N.N said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No, it was probably the Black Sea flood that is the origin of the global flood of the Bible and other cultures and myths. A whole continent underwater? I don't think so.


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 10, 2011)

machomuu said:
			
		

> ProtoKun7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Because a linear existence restricted by time is all we've ever known. There are many things that are beyond our comprehension, but weirdly, the concept of existing outside of time doesn't seem as hard to grasp as some other concepts for me.


----------



## Magmorph (Apr 10, 2011)

No two people ever believe in exactly the same god. Even if they are members of the same religion everyone has a god that is different. This is a side effect of believing in something that has no evidence. Nothing can be proved or disproved about God so people are free to alter him to their liking. If you don't agree with something in your holy book you can pass it off as a metaphor.


----------



## machomuu (Apr 10, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> machomuu said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


But we don't know everything about God, so should either of us really be asserting a notion based on logic when God has been thought to do the impossible and the unthinkable?


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 10, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> No, it was probably the Black Sea flood that is the origin of the global flood of the Bible and other cultures and myths. A whole continent underwater? I don't think so.


Considering the sheer amount of water on the Earth compared to the amount of landmass above sea level, I don't see how that's so hard to comprehend.


----------



## Necron (Apr 10, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Necron N.N said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


With the things going on at this time, I'd belive it.


----------



## DSGamer64 (Apr 10, 2011)

injected11 said:
			
		

> Argentum Vir said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Some stories in the Bible seem to be a bit far fetched to be honest, that has always been one that I found hard to fully believe. I mean, in theory it would work, but that would have to be one big honking boat and it wouldn't explain how many of the creatures have lived in their natural habitats for such a long time and even evolved as well. And what about the civilizations that pre-date the Bible? The Mayan civilization has been traced 2000 years prior to the birth of Jesus, and their height of development ending some 900 years after his death, around the time when the Spanish Conquistadors started discovering and colonizing the Americas. The Egyptians pre-date the birth of Jesus by roughly 5500 years. Both these civilizations, along with many others, existed before and during the existence of Jesus, and survived many of the events that have happened during his life and after. The story of Noah's Ark is from 600 AD from what I have read, so how is it that this flood which lasted from January of 600 AD until February of 601 AD, did not wipe out these civilizations along with the rest of the planet? There are always many questions about the Bible's stories, while some of them are fun to believe, they aren't really plausible based on the existence and scriptures of ancient civilizations that have existed for thousands of years and have enough documentation to prove certain things in the Old Testament to be inaccurate to our time lines.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 10, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


There is no evidence of a flood of such magnitude. Facts dictates there wasn't a worldwide flood in recent history. There was a big local one, but it wasn't even near global.


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 10, 2011)

DSGamer64 said:
			
		

> The story of Noah's Ark is from 600 AD from what I have read, so how is it that this flood which lasted from January of 600 AD until February of 601 AD, did not wipe out these civilizations along with the rest of the planet?


Where is it you heard that? Noah was around closer to the beginning of human history and before Jesus, rather than 600 years afterwards.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 10, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> DSGamer64 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It's actually closer to 2300 BC. Hardly the beginning of human history.


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 10, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> ProtoKun7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I said closer to the beginning, not _the_ beginning.


----------



## Necron (Apr 10, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> ProtoKun7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Depends of what are your basis. The Bible wasn't written in the exact moment it happened. If I remember well, the Earth according to the Bible is 14.000 years old.


----------



## machomuu (Apr 10, 2011)

DSGamer64 said:
			
		

> injected11 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I seriously think we would have indisputable proof if it were 600 AD, especially since would have happened near the beginning of the Dark Ages


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 10, 2011)

Necron N.N said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


According to the Bible, the Earth is 6000 years old.


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 10, 2011)

Necron N.N said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


There's no conclusive age given to the Earth itself, though Adam's era is dated somewhere around the 4000 BCE mark.

Around 4,026, actually.


----------



## gamefreak94 (Apr 10, 2011)

I don't believe in god, after reading all that history stuff and science, it's seems kind of clear that god doesn't exist - 3-
Although this is only my opinion.


----------



## machomuu (Apr 10, 2011)

gamefreak94 said:
			
		

> I don't believe in god, after reading all that history stuff and science, it's seems kind of clear that god doesn't exist - 3-
> Although this is only my opinion.


Are you simply an atheist, or do you have some other religion?


----------



## SinHarvest24 (Apr 10, 2011)




----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 10, 2011)

sinharvest24 said:
			
		

>


Don't make useless, one word posts.


----------



## Necron (Apr 10, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Necron N.N said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


My bad. It was between 6000 and 7000.


----------



## injected11 (Apr 10, 2011)

Necron N.N said:
			
		

> injected11 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


-Even if God told him how to make it, how did he manage to construct a ship that wouldn't sink under _world-ending_ conditions, when modern (ie made with better technology, materials, and tools) boats sink and capsize relatively frequently under non-dangerous conditions?
-How did it take him 100 years to make when the life expectancy would've been significantly less than it is today? (Likely close to 25-35 years)
-How did God 'guide' the non-flying, non-aquatic animals across vast bodies of water?
-How did they not only gather enough food for 2 of every animal on the planet (with distinct dietary needs) for 40 days, but how did none of it go bad without any refrigeration? One elephant alone eats ~650 pounds of food per day, and there would have been 2 of every variety of elephant.
-How did 8 people have the knowledge of each animals specific needs to keep it alive for 40 days, outside of it's habitat, and on an unnatural diet?


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 10, 2011)

injected11 said:
			
		

> Necron N.N said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Noah is said to have lived over 600 years.


----------



## Necron (Apr 10, 2011)

injected11 said:
			
		

> Necron N.N said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



1)It may sound stupid, but it was made by God. Like I said, you had to think some things with faith basis. God instructed him to construt the Arc in a way it would sunk.
2)Again, part with point one. Noah lived like 500-600 years.
3)Somewhere in the thread I said it probably was the world at that time, maybe a continent. I cant say It was like that. I will expand this point below**.
4)People has survived thousand of years without a refrigerator. And the Ark was very very big, so it could have fitted a lot of food.
5)Point one again. God helped to keep the animals quiet (for the unnatural habitat), and they ate just vegetables at that time.

**Speaking with someone one day, I asked him about the point of the animals. There were probably some animals that died too in the flood. Many scientists put one argument to say that this didn't happened: Dinosaurs.
Probably these animals were left out of the arc because of their size. Also, in some parts of the Bible (psalms) there are some descriptions of collosal things, maybe referring to dinosaurs.

PM me if you need a more vast explanation, I take too much time to write the post and sometimes is lost between others.


----------



## Dangy (Apr 11, 2011)

This is the way I look at it. Every popular religion in the United States was started by a man; besides the Catholic Church. (Unless you want to include Christ outside of his divine nature as a Man.)



Jehovah's Witnesses (I like to call them Russellites) were started by Charles Russel. Charles Russel would tour the world to promote his "new religious sect", along the way he would lie, and even lied under oath.

The Mormons or self proclaimed "Latter-Day Saints" were founded by a man named Joseph Smith. His main goal was to prepare for the "second coming of Christ" by building a "new Jerusalem" in America. He claimed an angel appeared to him when he was 17.


The Baptists crack me up. There is no logic behind this "religion". They believe that all you have to do is accept Jesus as your person savior, and you will go to Heaven. Yeah, _riiiiighhhttt_.


Those are the three most popular "religions" around my area.


----------



## Raiser (Apr 11, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Noah is said to have* lived over 600 years*.


I'm sorry, but that is just hilarious.


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Apr 11, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> Necron N.N said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This is just Bible-debate, right? Not a real debate over the age of the earth?

And for the current debate: The arc never existed. It's impossible...


----------



## Dangy (Apr 11, 2011)

Raiser said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It is said that the lived so long because there was no form of writing or documentation.


----------



## injected11 (Apr 11, 2011)

Necron N.N said:
			
		

> 1)It may sound stupid, but it was made by God. Like I said, you had to think some things with faith basis. God instructed him to construt the Arc in a way it would sunk.
> 2)Again, part with point one. Noah lived like 500-600 years.
> 3)Somewhere in the thread I said it probably was the world at that time, maybe a continent. I cant say It was like that. I will expand this point below**.
> 4)People has survived thousand of years without a refrigerator. *And the Ark was very very big, so it could have fitted a lot of food.*
> ...


Food spoils and goes to waste. Without preservatives or refrigeration (+ all the animals' body heat), it would spoil quite quickly.

Doesn't make much of any sense to me. Any of it. Also why would God give Noah so much direct help when he apparently does nothing to help people or animals today?

Also, not all dinosaurs were huge. They varied from rat-sized to gigantic. There would have been no reason to exclude the smaller dinosaurs. There would have been no reason to exclude the larger ones either since God surely would have been able to come up with a way to fit them on a boat that he created.

And what about salt-water / fresh-water marine life? Wouldn't one type have been wiped out completely as well?


----------



## whoomph (Apr 11, 2011)

tagzard said:
			
		

> Whats your religion


Census says Jedi


----------



## Tanas (Apr 11, 2011)

This vid shows how pathetic and childish the supposed flood really is.
[youtube]I225Vcs3X0g[/youtube]


----------



## Dangy (Apr 11, 2011)

injected11 said:
			
		

> ...from rat-sized to gigantic. There would have been no reason to exclude the smaller dinosaurs. There would have been no reason to exclude the larger ones either since God surely would... (snip'd)



Injected, I wouldn't really take this guy's retorts seriously. If he makes simple mistakes like "fitted a lot of food" he probably isn't very intellectual.


----------



## Advi (Apr 11, 2011)

i always laugh whenever i see people debating evidence when it comes to religion.
religion is based on faith, it does not require any actual evidence. its reasoning lies within intuition.

why do people argue that? if you feel any sort of need to go to any length to disprove somebody's religious beliefs, you're either a basement dwelling idiot or kool and edgy teenager. probably both.


----------



## Dangy (Apr 11, 2011)

Advi said:
			
		

> i always laugh whenever i see people debating evidence when it comes to religion.
> religion is based on faith, it does not require any actual evidence. its reasoning lies within intuition.



I agree. Religion is man's approach to God, based on faith.


----------



## Necron (Apr 11, 2011)

injected11 said:
			
		

> Necron N.N said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yep. Recently I was reading the Bible to remember some points.
At that time, humankind wasnt connected to God whatsoever. He intented to wipe it all, but saw Noah (Genesis 6, 5-8). If you read Apocalipsis, something like in this chapter is going to happen in the future.
About the animals, he says to Noah to take from the "clean" (cant remember how it is said in english, but you understand the point) seven couples and from the "not clean" animals, just take a couple. In this selection, these animal are the terrestrial animals. Here most of the big dinosaur could have been left out.

About the marine life, it is not named, so they werent inside the arc. Surely, some kind of fish died of not being in salty/fresh water.


----------



## Advi (Apr 11, 2011)

Dangy said:
			
		

> Advi said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


or allah, or vishnu, or xenu.


----------



## Dangy (Apr 11, 2011)

Advi said:
			
		

> Dangy said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



God, as in a higher-being. Most religion's refer to their "higher-being" as *God*, no matter the name.


----------



## Selim873 (Apr 11, 2011)

junkerde said:
			
		

> ```
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBVrPG2qmnI
> ```
> POWER OF RELigION!



Am I the only one who knew what this was going to be before I clicked it?   
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





Anyways, I'm a Christian, but I'm not really into it, I actually start to feel uncomfortable when it gets to the whole "Jesus" ordeal, even if I want to, it's just weird to me...  I like to keep things simple, to me, the Bible translates to; God exists, he had a son, and then he died, and now he's a zombie that knows what everybody's doing  
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 .  The End.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 11, 2011)

Raiser said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I know, right? 
The Bible cracks me up sometimes.

@ Uncle FEFL, yes it was a Bible debate, not a debate about the actual age of the Earth. That would be stupid.


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Apr 11, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Raiser said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


OK good. Just making sure...


----------



## KingdomBlade (Apr 11, 2011)

Necron N.N said:
			
		

> injected11 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



If we judge it from the text, no animal should have been left out. Look:

"Take with you seven pairs of every kind of clean animal, a male and its mate, and one pair of every kind of unclean animal, a male and its mate, 3 and also seven pairs of every kind of bird, male and female, to keep their various kinds alive throughout the earth."

That means all kinds of animals should have been included, which, in logical terms, is quite impossible provided that a pair of each kind of dinosaur should have been there, even if they were, how you say, "unclean". Even if they were "unclean", all species of terrestrial animals should be there, and in that case, based on the measurements and the fact that he used wood only, the thing would break as soon as a dinosaur steps into there.


----------



## whoomph (Apr 11, 2011)

My google/god assisted search for similar threads led me to this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fictional_religions#T
Tempism it is then.


----------



## Necron (Apr 11, 2011)

KingdomBlade said:
			
		

> Necron N.N said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


:/ Translations differ from one language to another. In my bible it doesnt say "their various kinds", but it is implied. So now Im pointless about the dinosaurs (at least, the big ones) Gotta read some parts if I find something.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 11, 2011)

Can we all agree there weren't dinosaurs 6000 years ago and close that debate?


----------



## The Catboy (Apr 11, 2011)

whoomph said:
			
		

> My google/god assisted search for similar threads led me to this:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fictional_religions#T
> Tempism it is then.


I am for that religion 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



I shall fallow Tempism from now on!


----------



## MFDC12 (Apr 11, 2011)

i dont think the bible should be taken literally - none of it. even in all my years of catholic school (prek -> 12th grade), no teacher of mine has EVER said the bible should be taken literally. but that still doesn't stop people from doing that ;/


----------



## DSGamer64 (Apr 11, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Either way the Egyptians date back to 5500 BC, and still exist today along with their monuments and their society of worshipping gods and creating mummies existed until the Roman Empire took rule in 35 BC.


----------



## Selim873 (Apr 11, 2011)

whoomph said:
			
		

> My google/god assisted search for similar threads led me to this:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fictional_religions#T
> Tempism it is then.








 You sir, just made my night!  Have you read the 8 Commandments of Tempism?


----------



## _Chaz_ (Apr 11, 2011)

Tempism is now my religion, I've converted and am very happy.


----------



## Terminator02 (Apr 11, 2011)

whoomph said:
			
		

> My google/god assisted search for similar threads led me to this:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fictional_religions#T
> Tempism it is then.


----------



## DSGamer64 (Apr 11, 2011)

Raiser said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And just another reason to believe the Bible is a joke and is filled with false tales of people who never existed and a man who is proclaimed to be the saviour or the human race yet no one can actually prove that he did all the things that are claimed in the Bible. I mean, a man turning water into wine (hypocritical because most die hard Christians think drinking is immoral), walking on water (witch craft is also apparently against the Bible) and dying on a cross only to be resurrected is either the work of the Devil or some other source of evil doing according to many religious folks. A man living for 600 years is physically impossible, not to mention the earliest known structures of any kind were primitive at best, building a ship that can hold literally tens of thousands of animals would be humanly impossible from a design point of view as there was neither the technology nor the know how to do so. 

I see more evidence that we evolved from primates thousands of years ago then being created by some invisible being.


----------



## MFDC12 (Apr 11, 2011)

DSGamer64 said:
			
		

> Raiser said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



of course, all that is implying that the bible is meant to be taken 100% literally

not everyone does. like i said, after all the years in catholic school, and knowing many, many different people in multiple denominations, not once have i met someone who took the bible literally (at least irl).

im for neither side in this argument however i do think the bible does have some stories that show good morals that people should live by.


----------



## machomuu (Apr 11, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> injected11 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And Moses is said to have lived over 1000 years (I'm not joking).  However, they say that time is distorted.  Alot.  Those 1000 were acually much less, somewhere around 100 IIRC.


----------



## Terminator02 (Apr 11, 2011)

i remember reading something about people living a looooot longer before the blood, and there is some scientific evidence to back it up


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 11, 2011)

Terminator02 said:
			
		

> i remember reading something about people living a looooot longer before the blood, and there is some scientific evidence to back it up


Except there wasn't a flood.


----------



## KingdomBlade (Apr 11, 2011)

Terminator02 said:
			
		

> whoomph said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fictional_religions#P
Penis.


----------



## Terminator02 (Apr 11, 2011)

and that's y i usually don't even bother, have fun getting no where

Edit: @pyr


----------



## MFDC12 (Apr 11, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Terminator02 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



actually, i do remember reading that there was a great flood, and how it was mentioned in other texts aside from the bible. i could be wrong though


----------



## DSGamer64 (Apr 11, 2011)

MFDC12 said:
			
		

> DSGamer64 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Of course it shouldn't be taken seriously, in fact none of the Bible should be. Some people try to act like everything in the Bible is accurate and true and that we shouldn't make fun of it, yet some of the stories are completely contradictory to what people believe these days.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 11, 2011)

MFDC12 said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The was a major local flood a few thousand years ago, the Black Sea flood. That's where the stories come from. Because there never was a global flood in known history.


----------



## Dangy (Apr 11, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> The was a major local flood a few thousand years ago, the Black Sea flood. That's where the stories come from. Because there never was a global flood in *known* history.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 11, 2011)

Dangy said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> > The was a major local flood a few thousand years ago, the Black Sea flood. That's where the stories come from. Because there never was a global flood in *known* history.


The great flood would have happened around 4000 BC. That's part of known history. A flood of such magnitude would have left traces that would be easily seen today. We don't see them. Ergo, there wasn't a global flood. Stop arguing, it's pointless.


----------



## Dangy (Apr 11, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Dangy said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yet you keep arguing.


----------



## whoomph (Apr 11, 2011)

antwill said:
			
		

> serious question here guys; why is scientology made fun of, but mormonism isn't?


You sure about that?
Joseph Smith song
http://www.bookofmormonbroadway.com/
Skeptic's Annotated Book of Mormon


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 11, 2011)

Dangy said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Because I'm right and yet the debate continues.


----------



## Forstride (Apr 11, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Because I'm right and yet the debate continues.


So I'm guessing you were alive back then?  Such arrogance...

You never know what parts of history might not have been recorded, or which parts were falsified, etc.  Assuming you're right just because it makes sense to you is pretty ignorant, and it makes you sound like a complete jackass.


----------



## Vulpes Abnocto (Apr 11, 2011)

Well this topic actually progressed much further than I expected it to before degenerating into "I'm right about everything!" comments.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 11, 2011)

TDWP FTW said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Never said I was right about everything. Just that it was fact that a global flood didn't happen.


----------



## KingVamp (Apr 11, 2011)

Not saying you wrong, but it not possible to find everything or evidences of everything in the past.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 11, 2011)

KingVamp said:
			
		

> Not saying you wrong, but it not possible to find everything or evidences of everything in the past.


I know, but in the case of an event that would have affected all of the planet not so long ago would leave some kind of trace. A global flood didn't happen. That is cold, hard fact. If it did, there wouldn't be Egyptians today, as their civilization predates the assumed time the flood took place. The same can be said for the chinese and the mayas. There was definetely NOT a global flood. There was a major LOCAL flood that happened at the Black Sea, but the whole planet wasn't affected.


----------



## DSGamer64 (Apr 11, 2011)

Simple displacement theories would suggest that a boat carrying 2 of every kind of animal would imply multiple things:

That the earth was one giant land mass so they could easily be rounded up.
The boat would have to be the length of at least 3 football fields and a few hundred feet tall.
If two of every animal were saved, there would need to be enough food to last through the flood which would increase the weight of the ship. 
The amount of water that would be required to displace a boat so large would ultimately just flood areas for miles upon miles. Also, there were no ports so how would you get a boat of such size into the Black Sea or anywhere for that matter without actually building it on water?
How does God know anything about engineering a boat larger then the Titanic? If he did, then the knowledge of such engineering would have been passed down through the centuries and we would have discovered much of the world a lot sooner then we did. For example Canada and the USA were colonized by Europeans during the 15th century. Why in the hell were there not boats of proportion to Noah's Ark by then if it actually existed?


----------



## antwill (Apr 11, 2011)

DSGamer64 said:
			
		

> Simple displacement theories would suggest that a boat carrying 2 of every kind of animal would imply multiple things:
> 
> That the earth was one giant land mass so they could easily be rounded up.
> The boat would have to be the length of at least 3 football fields and a few hundred feet tall.
> ...


How many arks do you think were needed back then with the capacity to carry millions of animals and also stop them all from eating each other even though they are all part of the food chain and would need to to survive?!


----------



## injected11 (Apr 11, 2011)

antwill said:
			
		

> How many arks do you think were needed back then with the capacity to carry millions of animals and also stop them all from eating each other even though they are all part of the food chain and would need to to survive?!


His point is that the boat-building knowledge would have been passed down, as everything else has. Nothing reflects that it was passed down.


----------



## KingVamp (Apr 11, 2011)

KingVamp said:
			
		

> Not saying you wrong, but it not possible to find everything or evidences of everything in the past.



Is it possible that information was lost?


----------



## antwill (Apr 11, 2011)

injected11 said:
			
		

> antwill said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And my point was, why try and over think the already ridiculous?


----------



## mysticwaterfall (Apr 11, 2011)

I know I'm late to the party here as they say, but anyways...

My personal religion is non-denominational Christian, as I believe I do not need any intermediary between myself and God. I do not need somebody to tell me what the Bible says for two reasons - a) I can read and b) true understanding can only come with the gift of illumination anyways. That doesn''t mean I won't listen to what other people say, but I do not automatically just take somebody elses interpenetration as the truth. That said, I do not claim any special understanding beyond my own personal interpretations, and the other outside reading I have done in parallel. Do I believe the Bible to be divinely inspired? Yes. Do I believe it is 100% literal? No, I believe a lot of it is to be taken metaphorically and/or in relation to the timeframe.
So, a few thoughts on topics from the last few pages of this:

-pre-flood people living for very long times
Long ages are not unique to the people; for instance, the sumerian king lists of the same era (3rd millennium bc) list reigns of 72,000 years each, which is much more absurd.

My personal belief is that the ages are more of a summary of a clan then of a single person. For instance, when it says that Noah lived 950 years, I believe this to be referring to Noah and his descendants. This is backed up by the very common theme of genealogies in Genesis frequently having exactly 10 names; the long ages fill in the gaps and summarize from one major patriarch to the next.

Other people believe that the ages serve a literary function, which I can also see, but I like my idea better.

-Moses age
Just a correction to whoever said Moses died at 1000 - he died at 120 according to DT 34:7

-The flood
I believe that the flood was local and constrained to the area of the patriarchs. As far as they were concerned, that was the "world". Considering how many non-biblical sources there are backing up a "great flood", I fully believe it happened. There's a good (but long) write up of this at http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/localflood.html

-------
EDIT: The Ark
We know the size of The Ark from Ge 6:15 - "This is how you are to build it: The ark is to be three hundred cubits long, fifty cubits wide and thirty cubits high." Converting, that is about 450 feet long, 75 feet wide and 45 feet high. Big, yes, but not outside the realms of possibility for the knowledge at the time. Considering the flood was local, we just need the animals known to the patriarchs, which severely limits the number. Certainly there weren't penguins, polar bears, whatever else on the ark.

For comparison, the Titanic was 882 ft 9 in long 175 ft high.
-------


-Dinosaurs
I'm sure dinosaurs on the ark were meant as a joke, but that would be impossible, as we all know they were long gone by then. Some people then ask, why aren't they mentioned in the Bible? Simply put, they aren't important in the grand scheme of things. If you're telling people in the desert 3,000 years ago about how you created the universe, would you mention animals that died 65MYA? I doubt it. You try writting a one page summary of 4.5BY of creation and see how well you do

-Age of the earth
I'm a "Day-age" person, which means I believe that the days in Genesis 1 are not literal "days" but instead indeterminate periods of time. The hebrew word used is yom, which means "a peroid of time". This goes with above - if God had told the patriarchs he created the Universe by causing a quantum instability in a one dimensional point that then expanded into all energy and matter, tweaked the laws of physics to his liking, guided evolution, etc,etc, they would not have understood any of it. So he simplified.

-Evolution (I know it wasn't mentioned per se, just throwing it in)
I believe God used evolution as his tool of creation. He set the framework of the universe up more or less as a giant program with set variables and let it run, tweaking it here and there. I do not believe in random, non directed evolution for a variety of reasons that are way too long to get into here, as this post is already huge.


----------



## Infinite Zero (Apr 11, 2011)

This topic was asking what our religion is. Not some history lesson.. sigh.


----------



## celeron53 (Apr 11, 2011)

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npgdw5Zb7TY&feature=aso[/youtube]

lulz


----------



## Densetsu (Apr 11, 2011)

mysticwaterfall said:
			
		

> _*snip*_This is probably the only long post in this entire topic that I've read through completely to the end.  I thought the points you brought up were interesting, mysticwaterfall.  I'm not a Christian, but at least I can respect your well-thought-out discourse.  I can only hope this would set the bar for what other posts in this topic should be like.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This discussion strayed from the original topic several hundred posts ago.  There's no way to stop a topic like this from evolving from "What's your religion?" to "Explain your beliefs."  The only reason this topic hasn't been locked is because no one has started flinging feces at each other yet (though a few breakouts have been averted with mod intervention).  Let's hope it stays that way.


----------



## Shockwind (Apr 11, 2011)

Infinite Zero said:
			
		

> This topic was asking what our religion is. Not some history lesson.. sigh.


Yeah, I agree with you. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 What's your religion IZ?


----------



## tlyee61 (Apr 11, 2011)

Christianity

nota1wordpost


----------



## KingdomBlade (Apr 11, 2011)

Provided that elephants were part of the "clean" animals, then there should have been 14 elephants within the ark. I'm not totally sure about how strong the ark supposedly was, but since it's made out of wood, the ark would probably break under the weight of 14 elephants together with many more animals.

Of course, this is purely hypothetical, but with the circumstances, I think that the ark is illogical. The flood is a possibility, I've been toying with the idea of the ice from the ice age melting and stuff, and since the flood is also mentioned in other cultures.


----------



## Nathan Drake (Apr 11, 2011)

KingdomBlade said:
			
		

> Provided that elephants were part of the "clean" animals, then there should have been 14 elephants within the ark. I'm not totally sure about how strong the ark supposedly was, but since it's made out of wood, the ark would probably break under the weight of 14 elephants together with many more animals.
> 
> Of course, this is purely hypothetical, but with the circumstances, I think that the ark is illogical. The flood is a possibility, I've been toying with the idea of the ice from the ice age melting and stuff, and since the flood is also mentioned in other cultures.



Wood is actually a very resilient material when put together correctly. It just falls under the troubles of any material like it if finish isn't applied properly, a sharp object is on board, etc. Really, really off topic though.

Of course the ark is illogical though. The concept of collecting two of supposedly every creature on the *entire planet* is as far fetched as could be. The world was already fairly disconnected at the time that tale occurs. No single person could ever achieve such a task, as the travel and collection would be impossible. Add that to the fact that every creature would have to get along while predator and prey were in the same place, and you have one screwed up, impossible scenario.

Floods were common after each ice age though. As far as I know, no single flood ever encased the entire planet. Pretty sure that is geologically impossible without one hell of a cataclysmic event that would wipe out near every living thing anyways.


----------



## KingdomBlade (Apr 11, 2011)

FiReFoX_7 said:
			
		

> Infinite Zero said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



C'mon guys (well, girl to IZ). Debates are fun. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Besides, you can expect it out of any thread that starts with religion. Perhaps we should bring the old Temp Debates thing back, I used to love those threads.


----------



## spinal_cord (Apr 11, 2011)

Necron N.N said:
			
		

> I can answer that. But you need to supose some things based on faith.
> When God said to Noah to make the arc, he gave him some instructions on how to make it. I can't remember now, but it was very very large and big (it took him like 100 years to make it)



It wasn't huge at all, it was only 300 cubits long, that's 137 meters, and tiny little dwarf by todays shipping standards. There is no way 2 of every animal on earth would have fit. It wouldn't take anywhere near 100 years to build, even by himself.




-- Why are other planets not mentioned by holy texts? There are billions and billions of them after all.


----------



## antwill (Apr 11, 2011)

spinal_cord said:
			
		

> -- Why are other planets not mentioned by holy texts? There are billions and billions of them after all.


Because the people who wrote those books, when the stories had been told for generations didn't know about the other planets, or evolution. That's why they only claim the Earth is thousands of years old, etc. And as has been said, you need to ignore evidence for faith to be maintained.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 11, 2011)

mysticwaterfall said:
			
		

> I know I'm late to the party here as they say, but anyways...
> 
> My personal religion is non-denominational Christian, as I believe I do not need any intermediary between myself and God. I do not need somebody to tell me what the Bible says for two reasons - a) I can read and b) true understanding can only come with the gift of illumination anyways. That doesn''t mean I won't listen to what other people say, but I do not automatically just take somebody elses interpenetration as the truth. That said, I do not claim any special understanding beyond my own personal interpretations, and the other outside reading I have done in parallel. Do I believe the Bible to be divinely inspired? Yes. Do I believe it is 100% literal? No, I believe a lot of it is to be taken metaphorically and/or in relation to the timeframe.
> So, a few thoughts on topics from the last few pages of this:
> ...


I remember seeing a mention of life on other planets in the Qur'an.


----------



## Vigilante (Apr 11, 2011)

Why is it when there is the word RELIGION in it kingdomblade just comes in and argues about it.(No one argues about your religion.)
Why doesn't he just stop does debates(Is she showing her greatness in debates or just solely her great intelligence?)
Just stop and be friendly for everyone's sake.
I mean it makes you look like a debate geek.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 11, 2011)

Vigilante said:
			
		

> Why is it when there is the word RELIGION in it kingdomblade just comes in and argues about it.(No one argues about your religion.)
> Why doesn't she just stop does debates(Is she showing her greatness in debates or just solely her great intelligence?)
> Just stop and be friendly for everyone's sake.
> I mean it makes you look like a debate geek.


Kingdom's a dude...
And debates are really fun, particularly about religion.
What's wrong with being a debate geek? Aren't we all a bit geeky?


----------



## Infinite Zero (Apr 11, 2011)

FiReFoX_7 said:
			
		

> Infinite Zero said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


LOL NO. There's nothing wrong about debating, if it comes to religion actually, expect it. Haha.


----------



## antwill (Apr 11, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> antwill said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I stand corrected, thank you for that pyrmon24. But still that's an awfully big leap from knowing there's other planets to somehow knowing there's life on other planets.


----------



## KingdomBlade (Apr 11, 2011)

Vigilante said:
			
		

> Why is it when there is the word RELIGION in it kingdomblade just comes in and argues about it.(No one argues about your religion.)
> Why doesn't she just stop does debates(Is she showing her greatness in debates or just solely her great intelligence?)
> Just stop and be friendly for everyone's sake.
> I mean it makes you look like a debate geek.



I'm a dude..... Please don't judge my gender based on my ava or Alice will come and stab you with a knife. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	







And I am friendly, you can't find a single one of my posts that aren't in EOF that are meant to directly insult a poster. Debating isn't mean, it's fun. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Well, for me anyways. And besides, if you've read the entire 35 pages of this thread, you'll see I posted like 4 times. (I would have posted a lot but I was out for a while) I am a debate geek and I'm proud of it. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 It's a lot more intellectually stimulating than spending my time watching subbed Naruto on Youtube and being a Naruto Geek or some other shit like that.

Also, in this thread, I only debated a few times. A lot of other people like debates, like Argentum Vir or pyrmon24.


----------



## boombox (Apr 11, 2011)

In my opinion Religion starts wars..always has..always will.

I don't mean to offend.

The only thing i believe in is science and Karma.


----------



## KingdomBlade (Apr 11, 2011)

boombox said:
			
		

> The only thing i believe in is science and Karma.



Hate to inquire (I actually don't mean to start a debate on it) but don't the two contradict each other? Please elaborate how your beliefs have coherence.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 11, 2011)

boombox said:
			
		

> In my opinion Religion starts wars..always has..always will.
> 
> I don't mean to offend.
> 
> The only thing i believe in is science and Karma.


Different opinions start wars. Yet, they are not bad.


----------



## KingdomBlade (Apr 11, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> boombox said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Religion is basically a difference in opinion isn't it? Yes, Religion is not bad in itself but it's us who create something bad about it.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 11, 2011)

antwill said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I found the verse in question. 
"And among God's signs is the creation of the heaven and the Earth, and the living creatures He has scattered through them."
Here, "heaven" has a meaning of Space. It basically says there are living critters on other planets scattered in space.


----------



## KingdomBlade (Apr 11, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> antwill said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So the Qur'an actually takes mention of extraterrestrial beings? Fascinating. I should check this out.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 11, 2011)

KingdomBlade said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


IIRC, it's surah 42, verse 29.


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 11, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Raiser said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The Bible writers knew the Earth was round and suspended in space (due to the divine inspiration) when people in more recent years still thought it was flat and sitting on a great big turtle.


----------



## Domination (Apr 11, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> DSGamer64 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Errrr, PK, no offense since you're a cool dude and all, but are you even remotely aware of anything about Darwinism? You can't actually evolve "nowadays" because it's too small of a time frame, evolution takes tens of thousands of years. You can't see a drastic change in just a meager thousand years of civilisation, it's a slow and gradual adaptation to their environment. And there's the question of whether if its necessary for the species to evolve into organisms like us. Evolving into us is not the most important thing for them, evolving into something that helps them survive better in their environment is what's important. And most probably, they are already at their "ultimate" adapted form.

Here's a link to clear it up more, it's actually a common misconception by people though: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/If_people_evolve...here_still_apes


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 11, 2011)

Domination said:
			
		

> ProtoKun7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


But my point is, going by that theory, there should be some apes around today that are half way in-between human and ape. There aren't.


----------



## MrCooper (Apr 11, 2011)

This witch craft subject is too big for the temp!


----------



## KingdomBlade (Apr 11, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> Domination said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It's a common misconception that humans evolved from the apes that exist now. They don't. We evolved from an ancestor that was an ape, but not the modern ape. That ancestor, through the process of natural selection, evolved into humans, along with the modern apes we know now.

Also, evolution occurs in a way that is determined by specific circumstances, and even then it takes place millions of years.


----------



## antwill (Apr 11, 2011)

MrCooper said:
			
		

> This witch craft subject is too big for the temp!


Witch craft? Hardly, it was only ever something invented by people as a way of comforting themselves and to explain something they didn't fully understand at the time. Then again you can't help but admire the balls it takes for an organisation to have a sadist like Mother Teresa declared a 'saint'.


----------



## KingdomBlade (Apr 11, 2011)

antwill said:
			
		

> MrCooper said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


How in hell is she a sadist?


----------



## Vulpes Abnocto (Apr 11, 2011)

We're finding apes that have been using tools. Presumably from watching us, but perhaps from their own experience and adaptation. Who is to say that they're not continually evolving. 
Evolution doesn't say that apes _have_ to become more human-like to evolve. Humanity may not necessarily be the end product of the evolution of all primates.

_/advocatus diaboli_


EDIT: This is the very first time I've heard the terms "Mother Teresa" and "Sadist" in the same sentence. Please explain what you mean.


----------



## Veho (Apr 11, 2011)

antwill said:
			
		

> a sadist like Mother Teresa


You've been reading the Landover Baptist Church page again, haven't you?


----------



## Tanas (Apr 11, 2011)

Would exactly call mother Teresa a sadist, but she certainly was, a two faced hypercritical old hag.
Instead of thinking that the sun shines out of her arse, why not try reading up on her, before commenting.


----------



## KingdomBlade (Apr 11, 2011)

Tanas said:
			
		

> Would exactly call mother Teresa a sadist, but she certainly was, a two faced hypercritical old hag.



Yet she was a very important icon of peace?


----------



## Vulpes Abnocto (Apr 11, 2011)

Tanas: Or you could just enlighten us.
As it stands this just sounds like you're trying to start an argument.


----------



## Zorua (Apr 11, 2011)

Tanas said:
			
		

> Would exactly call mother Teresa a sadist, but she certainly was, a two faced hypercritical old hag.



Yeah, I totally agree. Precisely why she spent her whole life helping the needy.


----------



## antwill (Apr 11, 2011)

Vulpes Abnocto said:
			
		

> This is the very first time I've heard the terms "Mother Teresa" and "Sadist" in the same sentence. Please explain what you mean.
> ?"[Mother Teresa] She enjoyed thousands of people dropping dead of starvation, dehydration and common curable illnesses, all around her feet! She only cared about converting the country to Christianity. She was one of world's greatest religious sadists; addicted to pain, suffering and watching death. She deserves no honors."
> 
> ~Eric Craig
> ...


Haha no, but I did google it after going back and seeing your post, it was pretty entertaining. Although not as entertaining as the Penn and Teller special on her.


----------



## Vulpes Abnocto (Apr 11, 2011)

Thank you Antwill. That was well worth reading and deserving of consideration. 
I myself was never Catholic but was inclined to believe the cliches that had always been spoken by them regarding Mother Teresa. 
Of course the real story is never as beautiful as the legend, but to think that they might be worlds apart is certainly eye-opening.


----------



## Tanas (Apr 11, 2011)

@Antwil, Did you happen to watch the Penn and Teller special on the Dalai Lama?, he himself doesn't come across in such a good light either.


----------



## antwill (Apr 11, 2011)

Vulpes Abnocto said:
			
		

> Thank you Antwill. That was well worth reading and deserving of consideration.
> I myself was never Catholic but was inclined to believe the cliches that had always been spoken by them regarding Mother Teresa.
> Of course the real story is never as beautiful as the legend, but to think that they might be worlds apart is certainly eye-opening.


It is kind of sad, to hear how she didn't even allow the sick to see their friends. Also the fact that the church changed the so called rules to have her declared a saint after finding someone to say she cured their stomach tumour, whose husband then goes and says it was all a lie and she was treated by doctors is kind of shady too.


----------



## KingdomBlade (Apr 11, 2011)

Crap. I'm getting creeped out now.

She has also been criticized for her view on suffering. She felt that suffering would bring people closer to Jesus. Sanal Edamaruku, President of Rationalist International , criticised the failure to give pain killers, writing that in her Homes for the Dying, one could _“hear the screams of people having maggots tweezered from their open wounds without pain relief. On principle, strong painkillers are even in hard cases not given. According to Mother Teresa's bizarre philosophy, it is ‘the most beautiful gift for a person that he can participate in the sufferings of Christ’._


----------



## antwill (Apr 11, 2011)

Tanas said:
			
		

> @Antwil, Did you happen to watch the Penn and Teller special on the Dalai Lama?, he himself doesn't come across in such a good light either.


No I didn't but then again no one on Penn and Teller comes out in a good light. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I can't really see how having your bullshit called out on could ever have someone come out of it in a good light.


----------



## Tanas (Apr 11, 2011)

antwill said:
			
		

> Tanas said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


But their bullshit is supposed to be based on facts, is it not?


----------



## MakiManPR (Apr 11, 2011)

PeregrinFig said:
			
		

> I don't even know what to call myself any more, I'm leaning towards agnostic. I was raised to be a Christian since I could barely talk, but as I got older I started thinking logically about things more and more, and science makes more sense than creationism in many ways. Natural selection seems virtually indisputable. Still, though, I can't just write off the possibility of some higher being. And, maybe this is just because habits don't die easily, but whenever I find myself stressed or in a tight situation I pray, if nothing else to calm my nerves.




At last I find someone with my same religion stuff
but I'm not atheist(nothing against you guys) I believe and go to the church almost every sunday is just that the science, literature, humanities, etc has opened/changed my mind  

And I have this big question why the Bible dont mention the dinosaurs in Genesis? they really existed


----------



## KingdomBlade (Apr 11, 2011)

MakiManPR said:
			
		

> PeregrinFig said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If they did list every kind of animal, it would take an enormous span of pages.

Not saying it's true though.


----------



## antwill (Apr 11, 2011)

KingdomBlade said:
			
		

> MakiManPR said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think he makes it seem like he was more referring to a general mention of dinosaurs, and not specific lists.


----------



## KingdomBlade (Apr 11, 2011)

antwill said:
			
		

> KingdomBlade said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I don't see Sea Urchins or Starfish or Cheetahs mentioned there either. What's your point?


----------



## antwill (Apr 11, 2011)

KingdomBlade said:
			
		

> antwill said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Dinosaurs. I didn't really have a point, just trying to express what he said, but then again how could anyone not even vaguely refer to or mention giant monsters such as dinosaurs, they're just so different to anything else you'd see on Earth.


----------



## MakiManPR (Apr 11, 2011)

KingdomBlade said:
			
		

> MakiManPR said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




u're kinda confused, in Genesis didn't say anything about the dinosaurs 
it start saying there was nothing meaning it, then God creates everything AND Adam and Eva
and if Adam and Eva(humans) were created along with everything else if u include the dinosaurs in means that we humans are as old as the dinosaurs and if we were created along side the dinosaurs if you goes with the science we should be extinct cuz the meteorite theory if you goes with the Bible the dinosaurs should still be alive 
And we know that they are extinct


----------



## KingdomBlade (Apr 11, 2011)

antwill said:
			
		

> KingdomBlade said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That's the entire point. The Bible isn't scientifically coherent in the first place. I never said it was. It's just that the Bible never MENTIONED that many animals, and so if one animal isn't included, it shouldn't be a surprise. They never listed the Starfish either, or the Woolly Mammoth which is also extinct.

EDIT: Damn, double post. Doesn't this combine?


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 11, 2011)

KingdomBlade said:
			
		

> The Bible isn't scientifically coherent in the first place.


Why is it you say that?


----------



## MakiManPR (Apr 11, 2011)

KingdomBlade said:
			
		

> MakiManPR said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Yeah but you r saying that you infers that the Bible says God creates them even if they aren't mentioned 
and that can't be cuz the Bible says God created everything in 7 days so is not possible cuz they are a lot older than us(humans)

EDIT

I mean we couldn't have live in the same age cuz if that happened we should be extincted as them too and Im talking the BIG ones not their descendants
I mean if there really was nothing before God created everything(dinosaurs not included) then who created them?


----------



## Redhorse (Apr 11, 2011)

ShadowFyre said:
			
		

> Apatheism. God shouldn't dictate anything we do, and we should act morally right just because it is, not cause of Heaven/Hell.



THANK YOU, I could not have said it better myself. In fact I didn't, but fully agree. 

I have nothing against other peoples version of thier religion but don't push it on me. I'm responding be cause I was asked. I have no right, as with the reverse of pushing my religion on another, I believe in doing good/right, not to have someone pat me on the back or feel better because I saved someone. Do right for it's own sake or for the sake of continuing civilization or civility. A good deed isn't done for the right reasons if I do it and run around telling everyone what I did and who I did it for, who I donated to etc..... that's nothing less than mental/verbal masturbation.

What am I? A person who believe in doing the right thing, even when no one else is looking. I am not defined by anything outside of myself, book object or being. Our actions, not our words, define us.

Lao Tzu Once said, to control another takes great strength to control ones own self takes true power and wisdom. (loosely quoted)


----------



## Tanas (Apr 11, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> KingdomBlade said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Probably down to such nonsense such as the cure for leprosy, as described here.

Leviticus 14:4-9 Then shall the priest command to take for him that is to be cleansed two birds alive and clean, and cedar wood, and scarlet, and hyssop: And the priest shall command that one of the birds be killed in an earthen vessel over running water: As for the living bird, he shall take it, and the cedar wood, and the scarlet, and the hyssop, and shall dip them and the living bird in the blood of the bird that was killed over the running water: And he shall sprinkle upon him that is to be cleansed from the leprosy seven times, and shall pronounce him clean, and shall let the living bird loose into the open field. And he that is to be cleansed shall wash his clothes, and shave off all his hair, and wash himself in water, that he may be clean: and after that he shall come into the camp, and shall tarry abroad out of his tent seven days. But it shall be on the seventh day, that he shall shave all his hair off his head and his beard and his eyebrows, even all his hair he shall shave off: and he shall wash his clothes, also he shall wash his flesh in water, and he shall be clean.

Much more valid and scientific than today modern cure, wouldn't you say?


----------



## mysticwaterfall (Apr 11, 2011)

Densetsu9000 said:
			
		

> This is probably the only long post in this entire topic that I've read through completely to the end.  I thought the points you brought up were interesting, mysticwaterfall.  I'm not a Christian, but at least I can respect your well-thought-out discourse.  I can only hope this would set the bar for what other posts in this topic should be like.
> 
> Thanks I'm glad someone appreciated it.
> 
> ...



I've looked through parts of it before, and I've looked through some gnostic stuff as well. But in general I defer to St. Paul in Gal 1:8 ("But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! "NIV) which would seem to me to counteract any later gospels, et al. I know that muslims believe that the transmission was corrupted and that they have the "pure" version, and I can respect that, I just don't agree with it. I'm preatty accepting of other faiths, barring bizzare cults. Now, if somebody tries to force there faith on me, well, that's a different story. Then the gloves are off. But a discussion about it, no problems with that.

-----------
Moving back to Noah's ark:
As I said in my previous post, considering the flood was local, we just need the animals known to the patriarchs, which severely limits the number. 
Certainly there weren't penguins, polar bears, whatever else on the ark.


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 11, 2011)

Tanas said:
			
		

> ProtoKun7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It may have aided in some way, it may have been symbolic, but when you consider that as the nation had God's support he could have told them to do anything else and they could still be healed.
Pretty sure throwing a body on a dead man's bones wouldn't bring them back to life in modern times as resurrection isn't being used at the moment, but when the body of a person was thrown onto Elisha's bones the man was resurrected.


----------



## MFDC12 (Apr 11, 2011)

Tanas said:
			
		

> ProtoKun7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



because all modern technology was available for leprosy (or any sickness really) back then


----------



## djleviticus (Apr 11, 2011)

Jesus is the way, the truth and the life. Knowone gets to God, but through him. Whether u believe it or not its true!!


----------



## Tonitonichopchop (Apr 11, 2011)

I'm Jewish by blood, but it isn't my religion, so I'm secular. In all honesty, I couldn't stay religious after looking at the facts from a logical, unbiased stand point. I have respect for religious people, and in some ways I envy them, but it isn't for me.


----------



## jurassicplayer (Apr 11, 2011)

Haruhiist/Kyonkoist  
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



With all honesty, my god is smexy.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 11, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> KingdomBlade said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The Bible say that plants were created before the Sun. That would be pretty useless, as plants need the Sun for photosynthesis.
God made Night and Day before there was stars. The Earth was made before the Sun.


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 11, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> ProtoKun7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The sun was already there.

Think of the process this way:

The first day had light come to Earth, but from an observer's view it's overcast so it's more of a general light rather than identifiable from any particular direction.
Plants were created on the third day, when the diffused light is quite strong and more than adequate for photosynthesis.
On the fourth day the luminaries came to make a division between day and night; the sources of light were made more clear at this point.

The original language words in that account refer, to the first day, to light as a general sense, and on the fourth, to the source of the light.


----------



## kupo3000 (Apr 11, 2011)

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcWR9sjBy3A[/youtube]


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 12, 2011)

kupo3000 said:
			
		

> [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcWR9sjBy3A[/youtube]


ROFL!
Funniest shit I have seen in a long while!


----------



## Sterling (Apr 12, 2011)

That's ridiculous. It's absolutely hilarious though. xD


----------



## Tanas (Apr 12, 2011)

kupo3000 said:
			
		

> [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcWR9sjBy3A[/youtube]


This is not a fairy tale, you'll find that this is a true story.

Heres the proof.
http://www.allonlinebible.com/read.php


----------



## injected11 (Apr 12, 2011)

Tanas said:
			
		

> kupo3000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Sorry, but posting a link to an online bible doesn't make it a true story.


----------



## Gameking-4 (Apr 12, 2011)

the power of RELIGION!!1!ONE!

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBVrPG2qmnI[/youtube]

LOL


----------



## KingdomBlade (Apr 12, 2011)

injected11 said:
			
		

> Tanas said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Agreed. How is the Bible proof of that? When I clicked on the link, I was hoping it was some sort of essay or article.


----------



## Vulpes Abnocto (Apr 12, 2011)

Having a few laughs is one thing, but this has been a good discussion for a long time now.
Lets not make this into a topic fit only for the EoF, now.
Thank you.


----------



## The Pi (Apr 12, 2011)

I'm an atheist. I depsise fundamentalist religions (yes, there really was a talking snake), as it removes freedom, however, more liberal religions do help people i.e The bible, The Qur'an etc are more of a moral guide rather than blatant truth in spite of this you DO NOT need a piece of text to make the "right" decision given any situation. Utilitarianism is unarguable really, only which form it takes is up for debate (total v average etc)


----------



## DrOctapu (Apr 14, 2011)

KingdomBlade said:
			
		

> injected11 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Actually I debated with a Christian about religion once and they cited the bible as proof.


----------



## Thesolcity (Apr 14, 2011)

chao1212 said:
			
		

> KingdomBlade said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'm christian, but citing the bible as proof is a load of bull. I use external sources, besides the bible. I don't like people who use the bible as evidence for the bible, it makes christians like me look bad >>. Along with young-earth creationists, they make people like me look retarded. But, I also see this in media, so I can't help it. You hear about smart christians in the media just about as often as you hear about non-violent muslims. :/


----------



## TrapperKeeperX (Apr 14, 2011)

Religion? Water Into Wine? & Virgin Birth? Like what Roger on American Dad said "It's Like Harry Potter but it causes Genocide & Bad Folk Music" Well it's like a Diaries of a Mad Man! Also the Bible is not true since it was created by man. Well think about it this way someone who says Exploring their own sexuality,Homosexuality,Abortions,Same Sex Marriages,Cursing,Sex,Drugs,Rock & Roll,Metal,Death Metal,etc. are sins it's nothing but a bunch of bullshit. Also what bothers me that good people die while evil people stay alive and that proves to me that there is no god! I don't believe in a Imaginary Talking Zombie AKA a Talking Dead Guy! For people call themselves good religious people I see this in politics they're extreme;y greedy and it's always the serious Conservative Christians that get greedy is greed one of the deadly sins???? According to them it's not getting greedy I say it is greed and it's always the serious Conservative Christians say the lord wants me to be rich and screw all of the poor people over. It's really sad to see people using religion for evil I really see religion abused it many ways. Catholics They won't believe in Abortions,Condoms,Birth Control but they won't stop molesting children yes I'm talking about the priest that molest kids Catholics are a bunch of kid fuckers. Religious people should have no control in anything Politics is one of them this is no wonder why we have separation of church & state and that one bitch from Jesus Camp said harry potter is the devil well she's a fucking dumb ass and she looks like she's hiding in the closet. 

Believe in what you want but In my own opinion I'm an Atheist and I can careless about religion because it causes problems like war,ignorance,intolerance,corruption,Lust,Gluttony,Greed,Sloth,Wrath,Envy, & Pride well that best explains it.


----------



## mysticwaterfall (Apr 14, 2011)

Thesolcity said:
			
		

> I'm christian, but citing the bible as proof is a load of bull. I use external sources, besides the bible. I don't like people who use the bible as evidence for the bible, it makes christians like me look bad >>. Along with young-earth creationists, they make people like me look retarded. But, I also see this in media, so I can't help it. You hear about smart christians in the media just about as often as you hear about non-violent muslims. :/



Definite +1 to that. The ultra-fundamentalists seem to be a very loud minority and yet get all the attention in the media and the popular conception and make the rest of us just look silly. One woman I used to know once put it this way:
"I don't even tell people I'm a Christian because of all the negative connotations that have built up around it in the media. I tell them I'm God's child and want to make him proud"

Now, I personally think that the further I have progressed in science classes (which, I've taken a lot of, for instance 8 chem classes, 5 bio classes, etc) the more I find that they reinforce the Bible more then they take it down, if you look at it in the way it should be looked at (ie, in relation to the time it was written)  The way I look at it, science is our way of understanding the universe which God created. So in essence, science is our way of understanding God.


----------



## mysticwaterfall (Apr 14, 2011)

TrapperKeeperX said:
			
		

> Religion? Water Into Wine? & Virgin Birth? Like what Roger on American Dad said "It's Like Harry Potter but it causes Genocide & Bad Folk Music" Well it's like a Diaries of a Mad Man! Also the Bible is not true since it was created by man. Well think about it this way someone who says Exploring their own sexuality,Homosexuality,Abortions,Same Sex Marriages,Cursing,Sex,Drugs,Rock & Roll,Metal,Death Metal,etc. are sins it's nothing but a bunch of bullshit. Also what bothers me that good people die while evil people stay alive and that proves to me that there is no god! I don't believe in a Imaginary Talking Zombie AKA a Talking Dead Guy! For people call themselves good religious people I see this in politics they're extreme;y greedy and it's always the serious Conservative Christians that get greedy is greed one of the deadly sins???? According to them it's not getting greedy I say it is greed and it's always the serious Conservative Christians say the lord wants me to be rich and screw all of the poor people over. It's really sad to see people using religion for evil I really see religion abused it many ways. Catholics They won't believe in Abortions,Condoms,Birth Control but they won't stop molesting children yes I'm talking about the priest that molest kids Catholics are a bunch of kid fuckers. Religious people should have no control in anything Politics is one of them this is no wonder why we have separation of church & state and that one bitch from Jesus Camp said harry potter is the devil well she's a fucking dumb ass and she looks like she's hiding in the closet.
> 
> Believe in what you want but In my own opinion I'm an Atheist and I can careless about religion because it causes problems like war,ignorance,intolerance,corruption,Lust,Gluttony,Greed,Sloth,Wrath,Envy, & Pride well that best explains it.



A lot of people pervert religion to there own ends. But this true of pretty much anything - patriotism is a great example. This does not make the religion itself bad, it makes the people who do the perversion bad. This is why St. Paul said we were justified by faith, not by deeds, because a truly good person can not help but do good deeds as a matter of course, since that is there nature. While anybody can do "good deeds",  but if they do them for the wrong reasons, it is a meaningless act.

Just because somebody says they are a christian does not mean they truly are one. I saw a great bumper sticker about it one day, "Going to church doesn't make you a christian any more then owning a toolbox makes you a mechanic". It is an unfortunate reality that a lot of people pay lip service to the faith and don't really believe in it.

Are there, for lack of a better term, crazy christians? Yes. Having seen Jesus Camp, it is one of the most messed up things I have ever seen. The people in that movie are not "normal christians" in my opinion, but instead are on the fringe. Is there anything wrong with liking Harry Potter? No, as long as you realize it's fiction and don't suddenly want to start practicing witchcraft (no offense intended here to wiccans, pagans, etc as I have relatives/friends who are. But I think you get the point) then there is no problem with it. Most of the things that are/were considered "sins" today are not referenced in the Bible at all, for instance, your mention of music. Jesus severely  criticizes the pharisees for trying to categorize every possible sin and rank them in importance; he believed that they weren't seeing the forest for the trees, among other things.

So yes, has religion been used for evil purposes? Yes. Have patriotism, love, and anything else you can think of also been? Yes.


----------



## KingdomBlade (Apr 14, 2011)

TrapperKeeperX said:
			
		

> Religion? Water Into Wine? & Virgin Birth? Like what Roger on American Dad said "It's Like Harry Potter but it causes Genocide & Bad Folk Music" Well it's like a Diaries of a Mad Man! Also the Bible is not true since it was created by man. Well think about it this way someone who says Exploring their own sexuality,Homosexuality,Abortions,Same Sex Marriages,Cursing,Sex,Drugs,Rock & Roll,Metal,Death Metal,etc. are sins it's nothing but a bunch of bullshit. Also what bothers me that good people die while evil people stay alive and that proves to me that there is no god! I don't believe in a Imaginary Talking Zombie AKA a Talking Dead Guy! For people call themselves good religious people I see this in politics they're extreme;y greedy and it's always the serious Conservative Christians that get greedy is greed one of the deadly sins???? According to them it's not getting greedy I say it is greed and it's always the serious Conservative Christians say the lord wants me to be rich and screw all of the poor people over. It's really sad to see people using religion for evil I really see religion abused it many ways. Catholics They won't believe in Abortions,Condoms,Birth Control but they won't stop molesting children yes I'm talking about the priest that molest kids Catholics are a bunch of kid fuckers. Religious people should have no control in anything Politics is one of them this is no wonder why we have separation of church & state and that one bitch from Jesus Camp said harry potter is the devil well she's a fucking dumb ass and she looks like she's hiding in the closet.
> 
> Believe in what you want but In my own opinion I'm an Atheist and I can careless about religion because it causes problems like war,ignorance,intolerance,corruption,Lust,Gluttony,Greed,Sloth,Wrath,Envy, & Pride well that best explains it.


Religion is not the problem. It never has been. Sadly, your perception of the situation is horribly single-minded.

Religion has more power in politics than you think. Maybe not in US, but in many countries, religion is one of the foundations of their political system.

Also, why do you not add spaces with your commas?


----------



## Tanas (Apr 14, 2011)

chao1212 said:
			
		

> KingdomBlade said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


What other proof do you have apart from the bible? the bible is all you theist's have, and tell me how can the bible not be used as proof? it is the infallible word of god after all.

And it appears that the sarcasm went over your heads.


----------



## machomuu (Apr 14, 2011)

Tanas said:
			
		

> chao1212 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's a generalization, I'm a theist (in a similar case to Catboy, sort of a mix between theist and agnostic but of no particular religion) and I never use the Bible as proof because I don't believe most of the stuff in it.


----------



## Slyakin (Apr 14, 2011)

But what about this:

Many facts in some holy books (I'm not saying which) are surprising accurate and were WAY ahead of those times.

Water in every living thing.
The earth orbits the sun.
The way that a fetus looks like a clot of blood.

And a lot of other things. Just throwing it out there.


----------



## Pyrmon (Apr 14, 2011)

Slyakin said:
			
		

> But what about this:
> 
> Many facts in some holy books (I'm not saying which) are surprising accurate and were WAY ahead of those times.
> 
> ...


I'm ahead of you Slyakin. Already mentioned these facts from the Qur'an.


----------



## Slyakin (Apr 14, 2011)

pyrmon24 said:
			
		

> Slyakin said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Cool! Carry on.


----------



## DeviousTom (Apr 14, 2011)

Not really sure what religion I am a part of, does that make me atheist, agnostic? I don't feel like I can fully deny the existence of a superior being, I don't think anyone can prove it really. I also don't think the idea of religion is really all that problematic, I just find that there are way too many areseholes who pervert the idea of religion, exploit it, and hide behind it and justify their actions because of their religion.


----------



## KingdomBlade (Apr 14, 2011)

DeviousTom said:
			
		

> Not really sure what religion I am, does that make me atheist, agnostic? I don't feel like I can fully deny the existence of a superior being, I don't think anyone can prove it really. I also don't think the idea of religion is really all that problematic, I just find that there are way too many areseholes who pervert the idea of religion, exploit it, and hide behind it and justify their actions because of their religion.


You sound agnostic really, since you seem open to both sides of the spectrum.


----------



## mysticwaterfall (Apr 14, 2011)

Slyakin said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Well, hey then. Below is a list from godandscience.org. While certainly I don't agree with everything on his site, I do like a lot of his stuff, since he takes the time to correlate things between the the so called "real world" and the bible. An example being  that the Bible correctly describes the current inflationary model of the big bang, thousands of years ago. That is, a single quantum disturbance of light (energy), the cosmos spreading out and expanding, creation of thermodynamics, etc.



Spoiler



The Bible and Science Scientific Principle 	Biblical Reference
Cosmology/Astronomy
Time had a beginning 	                                 2 Timothy 1:9, Titus 1:2, 1 Corinthians 2:7
The universe had a beginning 	                  Genesis 1:1, 2:4, Isaiah 42:5, etc.
The universe was created from the invisible 	   Hebrews 11:3
The dimensions of the universe were created 	Romans 8:38-39
The universe is expanding 	Job 9:8, Psalm 104:2, Isaiah 40:22, Isaiah 42:5, Isaiah 44:24, Isaiah 45:12, Isaiah 48:13, Isaiah 51:13, Jeremiah 10:12, Jeremiah 51:15, Zechariah 12:1
Creation of matter and energy has ended in the universe (refutes steady-state theory) 	Genesis 2:3-4
The universe is winding down and will "wear out" (second law of thermodynamics ensures that the universe will run down due to "heat death"-maximum entropy) 	Psalm 102:25-27
Describes the correct order of creation 	Genesis 1 (see Day-Age Genesis One Interpretation)
Number of stars exceeds a billion 	Genesis 22:17, Jeremiah 33:22
Every star is different 	1 Corinthians 15:41
Pleiades and Orion as gravitationally bound star groups 	Job 38:31
Light is in motion 	Job 38:19-20
The earth is controlled by the heavens 	Job 38:3
Earth is a sphere 	Isaiah 40:2213 Job 26:10
At any time, there is day and night on the Earth 	Luke 17:34-35
Earth is suspended in space 	Job 26:7

Earth Sciences
Earth began as a waterworld. Formation of continents by tectonic activity described 	Genesis 1:2-9, Psalm 104:6-9, Proverbs 3:19, Proverbs 8:27-29, Job 38:4-8, 2 Peter 3:5
Water cycle described 	Ecclesiastes 1:7; Isaiah 55:10, Job 36:27-28
Valleys exist on the bottom of the sea 	2 Samuel 22:16
Vents exist on the bottom of the sea 	Job 38:16
Ocean currents in the sea 	Psalm 8:8
Air has weight 	Job 28:25
Winds blow in circular paths 	Ecclesiastes 1:6

Biology
The chemical nature of human life 	Genesis 2:7, 3:19
Life of creatures are in the blood 	Leviticus 17:11
The nature of infectious diseases 	Leviticus 13:46

Importance of sanitation to health
Numbers 19, Deuteronomy 23:12-13, Leviticus 7-9


----------



## DeviousTom (Apr 14, 2011)

Not really sure about all the other Biblical references on that godandscience website, but the website misused the Isiah reference with the world being spherical, that line in the Bible actually says the world is circular. Just something I noticed when skimming over that list.


----------



## DrOctapu (Apr 14, 2011)

machomuu said:
			
		

> Tanas said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


To clarify, he was using the bible as proof to verify the contents of the bible, which, logically, makes no fucking sense.

(Quote pyramid!)


----------



## Thesolcity (Apr 14, 2011)

DeviousTom said:
			
		

> Not really sure about all the other Biblical references on that godandscience website, but the website misused the Isiah reference with the world being spherical, that line in the Bible actually says the world is circular. Just something I noticed when skimming over that list.



There wasn't really a hebrew word for sphere, so I assume it was translated over incorrectly, same with how they use "koh" as meaning the literal whole earth. :S


----------



## Tanas (Apr 14, 2011)

chao1212 said:
			
		

> machomuu said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Something that has no evidence of ever taken place  but is taken as fact, that's what makes no logical fucking sense.


----------



## Searinox (Apr 14, 2011)

Science is my religion. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Believing you are the cause of a cosmic game of chance, that your origins as a species are furry flearidden apes, and that on death you simply cease to exist may not be the most nice-sounding or colorful of concepts, but I believe this is what we have the most evidence for, and reality ain't always pleasant. I consider everything else to be just cultural manifestations written by mortal hands.


----------



## ShinyLatios (Apr 14, 2011)

Searinox said:
			
		

> Science is my religion.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



...I think this is right.


----------



## mysticwaterfall (Apr 14, 2011)

Searinox said:
			
		

> Science is my religion.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Of course, a lot of science is pure faith in ideas that may get replaced by something better later. We laugh at what scientific ideas people used to believe say, 100 years ago that have now been disproven. Who knows what they'll be lauging about that we think is true now 100 years from now. I'll never forget in one of my organic chem classes when the teacher said, "Of course, the molecules don't really do this. We made this up. But it serves as a nice model of what goes on in the 'big picture'".

For your specific points, I would bring up:

-Einstein famously said, "If the universe has a beginning, it must have a beginner".  He was deeply troubled by the fact that his work showed that the universe was not eternal, which was the leading belief at the time. He added the "cosmological constant" to correct for this, which he later called "the greatest blunder in my career" as it was proved unnecessary.  Scientists now pretty much universally believe in the hyper inflationary model of the big bang. Stephen Hawking of course famously believes that modified string theory can cause spontaneous universal creation based on the laws of physics which just so happen to exist in the way to do this. That takes a lot more faith then religion does if you ask me.

---------
EDIT: Or, as John Lennox puts it:

"But contrary to what Hawking claims, physical laws can never provide a complete explanation of the universe. Laws themselves do not create anything, they are merely a description of what happens under certain conditions.
...

Hawking's argument appears to me even more illogical when he says the existence of gravity means the creation of the universe was inevitable. But how did gravity exist in the first place? Who put it there? And what was the creative force behind its birth?

Similarly, when Hawking argues, in support of his theory of spontaneous creation, that it was only necessary for 'the blue touch paper' to be lit to 'set the universe going', the question must be: where did this blue touch paper come from? And who lit it, if not God?"

source
---------


-I have no problem with evolution per se; I have a problem with the neo-darwinistic model of evolution occurring through spontaneous random genetic mutation. As you learn in any biology course, mutations are almost universally harmful. There are many other problems you could bring up, but the bottom line is I believe God used evoloution as a tool, just like he set up the laws of physics et al, as a tool.

-There is no evidence at all what happens after we die, and there most likely never will be.


----------



## Searinox (Apr 14, 2011)

My faith in current theories is not absolute. This is a fundamental difference between religion and science. Religion will give you a set of laid-out facts as they were written by whoever wrote their holy texts many centuries ago. Religious adherents thus have ONE set of beliefs to, with a small margin of what may be their personal interpretation. There is a fixed doctrine. A belief in science is at the same time an ongoing pursuit. The doctrine will vary with time. You may believe facts that may one day be overturned completly. I'd rather stick with belief in something that is undergoing progress than fixed rigid concepts that offer less and less guidance to today's issues since the world is vastly different from how it was millenia ago.


----------



## mysticwaterfall (Apr 14, 2011)

Searinox said:
			
		

> My faith in current theories is not absolute. This is a fundamental difference between religion and science. Religion will give you a set of laid-out facts as they were written by whoever wrote their holy texts many centuries ago. Religious adherents thus have ONE set of beliefs to, with a small margin of what may be their personal interpretation. There is a fixed doctrine. A belief in science is at the same time an ongoing pursuit. The doctrine will vary with time. You may believe facts that may one day be overturned completly. I'd rather stick with belief in something that is undergoing progress than fixed rigid concepts that offer less and less guidance to today's issues since the world is vastly different from how it was millenia ago.




My post was not meant to be anti-Science, just to point out that Science is not as absolute as people perceive it to be, and can require as much if not more faith then religion does. I'm glad to see you acknowledge this point.

However, you seem to be of the common misconception that somehow Science and Religion are wholly incompatible, while this is not true. As I have said before, science is our way of understanding the universe which God created. Therefore, science helps us understand the mechanism of God so to speak. Or again, as Einstein put it:

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."
"I want to know how God created this world, I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details."

Einstein did not believe in a personal, biblical God. But he did have a more less agnostic view that there was some form of a supreme being. This is not an uncommon view amongst scientists.

As for religion being fixed,rigid and outdated, I would say that the core tenants of Christianity are applicable to any age: The new covenant  boils down to being a good person for the sole purpose of being a good person, not for any reward, just because it's the right thing to do. 

I would agree that the majority of the old testament is no longer applicable to us today, as it was written for the Hebrew society of the time; but again, that is why we are now under the new covenant, as widely expressed by Paul in his epistles and by Peter in Acts. Or as Jesus put it:

Matthew 22:34-40 (NIV)

Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: 

“Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”

Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’This is the first and greatest commandment.  And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.” 

Now, I don't force people to Christianity, as I don't force faith on anyone. But I'll debate about it anytime, anywhere. Science is an important part of the puzzle, but not the whole picture.


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Apr 15, 2011)

mysticwaterfall said:
			
		

> My post was not meant to be anti-Science, just to point out that Science is not as absolute as people perceive it to be, and can require as much if not more faith then religion does. I'm glad to see you acknowledge this point.
> 
> However, you seem to be of the common misconception that somehow Science and Religion are wholly incompatible, while this is not true. As I have said before, science is our way of understanding the universe which God created. Therefore, science helps us understand the mechanism of God so to speak.


I'm curious as to why you think science requires "faith," when in reality it requires quite the opposite. Let me clarify. Scientists do not base their opinions on faith, it is through evidence. Rejection of a theory is done the same way as a rejection of religion. To have faith, or lack thereof, in a theory is folly.

You're right...kind of. It is not the way of understanding how the universe was created by God, rather the science is to be interpreted --factually of course-- however one wants.

"God did it through the Big Bang."
"The Big Bang happened via a quantum fluctuation."

Whatever way the person wants to interpret it.


----------



## CCNaru (Apr 15, 2011)

I have no religion. no, I'm not an atheist either... I don't believe in anything/nothing.


----------



## Nathan Drake (Apr 15, 2011)

CCNaru said:
			
		

> I have no religion. no, I'm not an atheist either... I don't believe in anything/nothing.



If you don't believe in any form of a deity, you are basically the definition of an atheist. You carry no belief system already. Disbelief in any kind of God or anything of the like places you nicely in the atheist category. There is no "nothing" category.


----------



## Vulpes Abnocto (Apr 15, 2011)

CCNaru said:
			
		

> I have no religion. no, I'm not an atheist either... I don't believe in anything/nothing.



Correct me if I'm wrong, but would this be considered Nihilism?


----------



## mysticwaterfall (Apr 15, 2011)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> mysticwaterfall said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



While it is true for a lot of things in science there is direct evidence (for instance, Newton's laws of motion, gravity, etc, etc), there are a lot of other things that require you to have a belief that model your using is correct. Otherwise, theories would never be disproven and we would all still think the 4 humors controlled our health. To use a more recent example,the orbit model of the atom was accepted for quite a while. We now known this to be completely wrong and that electrons instead act as density clouds around the nucleus. People believed in the original model, even though they couldn't prove it. What is that if not faith?


----------



## Antoni-YO! (Apr 15, 2011)

I'm a Christian.


----------



## Sumea (Apr 15, 2011)

I dunno would I say myself as agno-whatever or at-whatever

I do not belong to church or any other religion by birth, thanks to my mother who decided to leave church herself before birth of any of her children, to let us choose ourselves. And she does not even hate church, she likes it very much.

I myself do not give much of attention to it. I usually make (funny) analogy that I would be very bad christian because I'd damn everything in name of God, every negative thing that happens (quite often) - but as for now I can damn them on whatever that does not offend anyone (I refer to this entity "the unholy space genie) - and no, I do not believe or pray to this unholy space genie, unholy space genie exists only as bane of mine, damn for too strong wind while being outside on him.


As for religious people, I am okay with them, but I do think that things like evolution, long history or earth etc. has been scientifically (same scientifically as whole motherfucking science of medicine that saves millions of lives) proven facts. If a christian wants to fight against it, I think he is stupid. If he would want to be a sneaky, and awesome bastard who I'd be okay with, he'd say "God is masterplan behind beginning of evolution, and god created earth in Seven days of his, that may very well be millions years to us" 

TL;DR:
I like science
EVERY christian should just say "god is one who 'rolled the ball' of evolution" and everyone is insta winners

People are OK.

Religion sucks only if stupid people make it suck.


----------



## BlueStar (Apr 15, 2011)

I lost it in a corner.


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Apr 16, 2011)

mysticwaterfall said:
			
		

> While it is true for a lot of things in science there is direct evidence (for instance, Newton's laws of motion, gravity, etc, etc), there are a lot of other things that require you to have a belief that model your using is correct. Otherwise, theories would never be disproven and we would all still think the 4 humors controlled our health. To use a more recent example,the orbit model of the atom was accepted for quite a while. We now known this to be completely wrong and that electrons instead act as density clouds around the nucleus. People believed in the original model, even though they couldn't prove it. What is that if not faith?



The Bohr model, still used today in the US (and I'm willing to bet nearly everywhere else), was not a model made with no evidence. It was an important model that used quantum mechanics to plot a 2-D model of an atom. Evidence supported it. And also, a theory is just that: a theory. Of course that particular theory could not be proven completely, because it was wrong. 

The keyword here is evidence. An ironically magical word, evidence is the difference between "faith" and rejection of an idea based on empirical data, observation, and logic. Faith did not go into the theory of the Big Bang, Big Crunch, or black holes. It was all evidence. And, of course, there will be errors. I love errors; it shows we grow more intelligent all the time.

Now...the only thing that can relate to "faith," I think, is the thought experiment. That's having faith that one is correct, but again, it IS based on evidence. Spaghettification is a thought process brought about using known facts about black holes.


----------



## DSGamer64 (Apr 16, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> pyrmon24 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yet none of your reasonings don't sound like a bunch of fairly tail bullshit to you? Sorry but the only texts that suggest anyone could be immortal or live for such vast lengths of time are all religious records. And of course the Bible was written by a bunch of followers of Jesus, pretty hard to prove that something isn't a complete load of hog wash when the whole book can't be proven to exist, it's basically a fictional novel without an official author.


----------



## metamaster (Apr 16, 2011)

^ That may be your opinion, but that's what faith consists of. Believing in God for a Christan is believing "blindly" for an Atheist. Science versus faith.
You technically can't be any more sure that Noah (and everyone else in that era) lived 600 years then that man went on the moon. Someone can say you "blindly" believe what you are given.
The new testament was written by followers of Jesus, the old testament was written by prophets.
Also, those who wrote the Bible aren't just "a bunch of followers". For every word in the Bible, blood was shed. Those weren't some random guys who decided to write a fiction book in their free time, they actually believed in their cause and a lot of them died for it.


----------



## machomuu (Apr 16, 2011)

ProtoKun7 said:
			
		

> machomuu said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's basically what I said.


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Apr 17, 2011)

machomuu said:
			
		

> ProtoKun7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You said it's said he lived for 1,000 years and that time was distorted. The time back then is pretty much as it was now, though I think the years were counted with 360 days or so rather than 365. The time wasn't distorted.


----------



## BlueStar (Apr 17, 2011)

"If we evolved from apes, then why don't we see any apes nowadays turning into humans?"

The theory of evolution doesn't say we evolved from modern day apes at all.  It says that us and other great apes shared a common ancestor.


----------



## Sumea (Apr 17, 2011)

BlueStar said:
			
		

> "If we evolved from apes, then why don't we see any apes nowadays turning into humans?"
> 
> The theory of evolution doesn't say we evolved from modern day apes at all.  It says that us and other great apes shared a common ancestor.



This. I appreciate wise people who are Christian. I do not appreciate statements like this, because it is like the person has to turn himself into 5th grader, and as extra starts act knowingly stupid. You know, like acting that dumb guy ironically.

As I said, If I am to meet a Christian and I'd say him "do you think evolution is real" and he'd answer "YES I DO, but do you know the root of all evolution" and I'd have to shrug, and he'd make this awesome choir yell "THE GOD, ONE AND ALMIGHTY" and I'd go "Can't argue with that even if it is not what I think" and we'd go and have a drink, hopefully.


----------



## mysticwaterfall (Apr 17, 2011)

Sumea said:
			
		

> As I said, If I am to meet a Christian and I'd say him "do you think evolution is real" and he'd answer "YES I DO, but do you know the root of all evolution" and I'd have to shrug, and he'd make this awesome choir yell "THE GOD, ONE AND ALMIGHTY" and I'd go "Can't argue with that even if it is not what I think" and we'd go and have a drink, hopefully.



Pretty much what I do, without the awesome choir effect of course...


----------



## DSGamer64 (Apr 17, 2011)

BlueStar said:
			
		

> "If we evolved from apes, then why don't we see any apes nowadays turning into humans?"
> 
> The theory of evolution doesn't say we evolved from modern day apes at all.  It says that us and other great apes shared a common ancestor.


On the same token, it can also be considered that we evolved from apes that no longer exist. Evolution does kill off species, I think the modern day reptiles are proof enough that all living organisms have evolved a lot over tens of thousands of years.


----------



## Sumea (Apr 18, 2011)

mysticwaterfall said:
			
		

> Sumea said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yeah, I just do not get the fights that come out of bit childish will of overpower and wanting to come out right, and neither side wants to be "wrong". It is so 1700's that people want to fight scientific facts, or about-damn-much-of-a-fact - Like when one scientist in 1800's was saying that planets do not orbit earth, but earth is orbiting sun among other planets.

That said, you are a awesome dude.

And well, I would be lying if I would say that there isn't stupid ass non-religious people.


----------



## KingdomBlade (Apr 18, 2011)

Sumea said:
			
		

> mysticwaterfall said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Like some idiots who say that Jesus is the son of Satan or some shit like that.


----------



## unseen4ce (Apr 18, 2011)

In Australia, Christians have no problem with evolution (I am not a Christian, but went to such a school). I can't understand why it is such a big deal to American Christians.


----------



## manaphy4ever (Apr 18, 2011)

I am muslim and proud


----------



## .Darky (Apr 18, 2011)

I'm an atheist.


----------



## Tanas (Apr 18, 2011)

KingdomBlade said:
			
		

> Sumea said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


god is Satan's evil alter-ego which does make jesus the son of Satan.


----------



## metamaster (Apr 18, 2011)

^ Satan, aka Lucifer, was one of the most powerful and respected angels that God had created. He fell when he wanted to be more powerful than God, thus pushing him away from goodness, creating evil (evil doesn't exist, it's the lack of goodness, like cold compared to hot). 
So the son of God is Jesus, and I guess the son of Satan would be the antichrist (though he himself is to assume that role through a human)


----------

