Teяa253
No life Poster
I am amazing. I know.
Posts: 70,114
|
Post by Teяa253 on Sept 12, 2008 18:17:24 GMT 1
Well, the point isn't really which is a defining factor, that just seems to be avoiding the point, but regardless, I think that religion and science have one key difference. One is almost entirely faith-based, whearas the other offers theories with evidence and support. Of course, theories are proven and disproven all the time, which of course changes "fact" for most people. The problem is, as science is used in everything, it becomes increasingly difficult for religion to keep itself together, so it sometimes has to adapt as well. However, there is no case in history when Religion has proved something and science has had to change to occupy it. This leads me to the conclusion that Religion is more affected by science than science is to religion. Meaning, of course, that even religion has to accept scientific proof, whereas science may have to accept religious proof, if there were any. As this has not happened, we can only assume that it isn't the case. hmm... my religion has not been changed once by science. if you want to disprove Cathloicism or something for me, that'd be swell. Belief does not equal religion. Belief means "knowing" something. Of course, knowing is relative, but "knowing" something means accepting it as true. "Faith" means doing so without a reason. That is where (certain) religion(s) are based. religion=set of beliefs. so in a way, even Atheism is a religion, because it is a set of beliefs (There is no God) Religion does not define science. You are, for one, assuming that science's goal is to "learn about the physical and better the people with that knowledge". This isn't how science is. It's goal is to find fact. but the only way to KNOW that it was fact is to have witnessed it firsthand. I'll elaborate on this later in this post. Whether beneficial or not. It is religion which seeks to better people. That's it's purpose. I mean, why else beleive in something beyond life? Because people don't like the idea of death. Real death. No more thinking or feeling death. Dead death. that's true, religion seeks to better people. to make them more responsible. Why do people NOT believe in God? perhaps because they don't want to have to take responsibility for their actions... it sounds like a good plan... don't bother to believe it. when we die we die and in the meantime we can do anything we want without getting punished. Sceince wants to explain every question there is, so that we know the answers. It is about simple facts, and the proving of such facts. It entertains certain theories above others if they seem more probable than others, but eventually, science has to find a way to proof or disprove it. Religion is not fact based. It is faith based. That poster seems to be a way of saying "We don't have evidence, so we disregard it as a factor". not really... you keep sidestepping the meaning. (hint: the meaning is right on the poster) Words and pictures are completely different... The kind of picture I'm talking about it a photograph. It captures light, and then produces an image based on the light, almost like an eye does. but do we have pictures of evolution? the big bang? no we do not. ^^ all we have are modern textbooks full of theories-- claimstkaen from the dictionary itself... here's what theory means... Theory--An unproven conjecture. here's nother one... Theory--(sciences) A coherent statement or set of statements that attempts to explain observed phenomena. game. Well, see, there's your problem. Things like Native American's are proven scientific fact. You see, they left these things called bones... evidence, you see, that they existed. And of course, the fact that they still exist and are alive is kind of a dead giveaway... Now, God, on the other hand, left nothing, and shows no proof of him existing today. well in that case, then my theory of The Book of Mormon is true. WE believe that the Native Americans were descendants of one of the peoples from that book (The Lamanites). AND, it says that they landed in "the promised land" (which is referenced to be America in several other places... I could find them) in a "narrow neck of land" (central America ^^). so I guess Mormons have evidence. score +1? =B Ah, but if he made some sort of proof... not a "sign". I can leave a "sign" of a dog crapping in a park, but that doesn't mean it did. (Coulda thought of a better analogy. Didn't) Proof is different than a "sign". no, I seriously doubt it would change anything... Pre-existance? Isn't that an endless loop? What about before said pre-existance? I mean, we can't of been like that for all eternity before now. That defeats the purpose of us being here now. I mean, why now? Why not just start us off in bodies? Or keep us as spirits? Or are we just like toys that can be turned on and turned off at will? you're missing the concept, and again trying to attach a beginning to something that does not have one. when I say God "created" us, I mean, he "organized" us. I believe that before we were even formed into spirits, that we were "intelligences" with no form. always been there, always will be. Well, you didn't answer the question I posed for you... you were not very clear. lol I only counted two anyways. Which of the three attributes, if any, do you assign to God and/or the Heavenly Mother? what 3 attributes? God has a body. he, Jesus and the holy ghost are 3 seperate people. anythign else? ~Azula~ |
|
buzzard
Skilled airbender
The only situation when swearing is allowed,BTW I'm an FMAnatic!
Posts: 104
|
Post by buzzard on Sept 12, 2008 18:19:13 GMT 1
Great off topic chatter guys.Anyway I don't think the present debate has any real answers,but heres to hoping for a big leap forward for science trough this experiment!
|
|
Orophin
No life Poster
Crikey! Dragon of the South, mate.
Posts: 44,407
|
Post by Orophin on Sept 13, 2008 15:00:02 GMT 1
hmm... my religion has not been changed once by science. if you want to disprove Cathloicism or something for me, that'd be swell. Well, not knowing your religion, I wouldn't know that. Isn't religion also defined as a set of practices, as well as beleifs? And of course, the original meaning of the word "religion": Reverance for God or the gods, careful pondering of divine things, piety, the res divinae. Now, using this, it's easy to see that Atheism is simply a word coined together to group the non-beleiving people together. It doesn't mean a beleif in the nonexistance of God/gods, but rather the absense of beleif. (Subtle difference) Even that isn't certain. But there are ways of obtaining reasonable evidence or proof of things. Now, tell me, have to even witnessed God firsthand? I mean, for your point to be valid, you would have had to, wouldn't you? You're only looking at it from one point of view. You say "Why not beleive in God?". Well, why should someone? Explain that to them, and theu're far more likely to understand than if you ask them why they don't. Here's an example: Why don't I go for a mile run every day? Because I can't be bothered. Why should I? Because I could live longer, and it would keep me fit and healthy. Now, your case: "Why don't you beleive in God?" No reason. I see no reason to go out of my way to beleive something without some sort of up-side. Why should I beleive in God? "Because... *Fill in the blanks, 'cos I can't think of a reason*" The meaning? There is no meaning. It's trying to make there be one, but there isn't. There is not a single sign of His existance. I know what a theory is. I also know that when a theory is reasonable and has provided evidentiary support, it is worth at least thinking about. I beleive Evolution because of the mass of evidence, ranging from species similarities, to what I call "bone" evidence. Basically, physical stuff we've found. (Not always bones, that's just a term I use.) But that evidence isn't religion based at all. In fact, your evidence only proves that they're here, and that they were here. I'm all too willing to beleive that the ancestors of the Native Americans arrived there and colonised the country (in a pre-modern way, obviously). But what is it you are trying to prove? I mean, humans migrated to nearly everywhere, originating in Africa, of course... Well, show someone proof and they'll at least give some thought to the idea. Give someone proof, rather than a supposed "sign", and there is always a difference in their response. Like, say, on the oposite angle, a scientist comes to someone and says he has "signs" of a meteor about to collide with Earth. The person either beleives him, or doesn't. Either way, later on, the scientist actually see's the meteor, and so can say "I have proof of a meteor about to hit Earth". Then, said meteor would be accepted as fact. But wait... isn't that another loop? I mean, what were we before that? Why change us? Why at that time? I mean, this again seems to show God as a child who just wants to play around with some toys, and be comepletely random as to the timing of doing so, rather than having a "plan". Sorry, let me re-state the attributes. 1. All powerful. (Can do anything, without exeption) 2. All knowing. (Knows all that has been, all that will be, and all that is. Knows your mind, your secrets, and what exactly is between your toes) 3. All good. (Kinda speaks for itself. Would never be cruel, heartless, or evil, because He loves us. Is total goodness) |
|
Teяa253
No life Poster
I am amazing. I know.
Posts: 70,114
|
Post by Teяa253 on Sept 13, 2008 15:56:30 GMT 1
Well, not knowing your religion, I wouldn't know that. good for you. =3 Isn't religion also defined as a set of practices, as well as beleifs? sure. the point? And of course, the original meaning of the word "religion": Reverance for God or the gods, careful pondering of divine things, piety, the res divinae. Now, using this, it's easy to see that Atheism is simply a word coined together to group the non-beleiving people together. It doesn't mean a beleif in the nonexistance of God/gods, but rather the absense of beleif. (Subtle difference) Even that isn't certain. But there are ways of obtaining reasonable evidence or proof of things. Now, tell me, have to even witnessed God firsthand? I mean, for your point to be valid, you would have had to, wouldn't you? you're just saying the same thing over and over. it all depends on what you think is "reasonable evidence". to me, the Bible is reasonable evidence. answeres to my prayers are reasonable evidence. You're only looking at it from one point of view. You say "Why not beleive in God?". Well, why should someone? Explain that to them, and theu're far more likely to understand than if you ask them why they don't. to do that, then we'd have to delve more into my personal life and how some of my prayers have been answered =P Here's an example: Why don't I go for a mile run every day? Because I can't be bothered. Why should I? Because I could live longer, and it would keep me fit and healthy. Now, your case: "Why don't you beleive in God?" No reason. I see no reason to go out of my way to beleive something without some sort of up-side. Why should I beleive in God? "Because... *Fill in the blanks, 'cos I can't think of a reason*" I believe in God partially because the alternative (evolution) story just sounds like something out of a sci-fi novel or something. it's just too far out. if people want to boast that they evolved from monkey, I guess they can. However, anytime that comes out, I am forced to laugh because of my inner Toph. (don't ask about that last part. =P ) I also believe because my parents taught me to pray, and in my personal life, I've had experiences where it has made a difference. (meaning that my parents are not the reason I believe) are the "answers" to my prayers coincidences? maybe so, maybe not. but kinda like my stance on the whole "life forming from nonliving matter" principle, I just think that some things are just too coincidental. The meaning? There is no meaning. It's trying to make there be one, but there isn't. There is not a single sign of His existance. except perhaps that some things in life are just not meant I know what a theory is. I also know that when a theory is reasonable and has provided evidentiary support, it is worth at least thinking about. I beleive Evolution because of the mass of evidence, ranging from species similarities, to what I call "bone" evidence. Basically, physical stuff we've found. (Not always bones, that's just a term I use.) and yet a theory is again something that is just used to try and better our understanding. the reason I don't believe it is because I don't believe in statistics that small. it'd be like throwing a 25000 piece puzzle into the air and expecting all the pieces to fall perfectly into place. it just doesn't happen. (and if anyone wants to use the pathetic fallacy "the pieces wouldn't lock" then let's say it was dropped high enough that they could obtain enough velocity that if two or more pieces did land that way that they'd lock) But that evidence isn't religion based at all. In fact, your evidence only proves that they're here, and that they were here. I'm all too willing to beleive that the ancestors of the Native Americans arrived there and colonised the country (in a pre-modern way, obviously). But what is it you are trying to prove? I mean, humans migrated to nearly everywhere, originating in Africa, of course... well, the Book of Mormon is not just a story of some people... it's a record. not sure about the Africa part, but somewhere around that area, yes. and similarly, I do believe that the "old world" (that area) was settled before the "new world". (hence the names.) and just like this debate cannot cover (and obviously has not) covered 1 post, trying to explain everything that is told in the book of Mormon cannot be done that way either. it'd be like trying to base your (anyones) beliefs on another persons rather than have a testimony of your own. (and when I say "testimony" I mean "a form of evidence that is obtained from a witness who makes a solemn statement or declaration of fact". it can apply to religion or science or whatever.) Well, show someone proof and they'll at least give some thought to the idea. Give someone proof, rather than a supposed "sign", and there is always a difference in their response. Like, say, on the oposite angle, a scientist comes to someone and says he has "signs" of a meteor about to collide with Earth. The person either beleives him, or doesn't. Either way, later on, the scientist actually see's the meteor, and so can say "I have proof of a meteor about to hit Earth". Then, said meteor would be accepted as fact. in my opinion the best way to "prove" (or disprove) the existence of God without just having faith is to follow that old Bible verse: "ask, and ye shall recieve" (aka ask if anyone's up there) and of course, few people who believe in God will actually bother with that, so... *doesn't bother to do anything else* But wait... isn't that another loop? I mean, what were we before that? Why change us? Why at that time? I mean, this again seems to show God as a child who just wants to play around with some toys, and be comepletely random as to the timing of doing so, rather than having a "plan". well, my God theory actually goes much, much deeper, even to the point where most other religions think that Mormons are "blasphemers" for even thinking of it. we believe that if certain conditions are met (righteousness, etc. I'd have to delve DEEP into Mormon principle to get them, but that would be straying off topic) that we can become like God. of course, that's where that principle ends, and religious "theory" comes into play. (note: the following is not a taught belief, but rather just a theory) the theory is that God was once like us and did the same thing on a different earth and then He became a God. of course, that's just a theory, and I don't really believe it either (don't really know anyone who does). I believe that God had reasons for everything he did and why he did it when he did. I believe that whatever those reasons are either not for us to know at this time or will be revealed in God's own due time. Sorry, let me re-state the attributes. 1. All powerful. (Can do anything, without exeption) 2. All knowing. (Knows all that has been, all that will be, and all that is. Knows your mind, your secrets, and what exactly is between your toes) 3. All good. (Kinda speaks for itself. Would never be cruel, heartless, or evil, because He loves us. Is total goodness) all of the above. and if anyone dares use the ever-so-pathetic excuse "then why does God let all this suffering happen?" I will do four things. 1. laugh in their faces for approximately 25.3 minutes. 2. call them a failure at life. 3. not do #s 1 and 2 4. tell them the answer. my answer is that there is opposition in all things. just like there is a God, there is also a Satan(devil). in order for Satan to be the opposite of God, he would have to be all evil. I believe God lets Satan do evil things in this world because this world is a "trial period" for us. I'd elaborate on this principle, but I think it explains itself enough (unless you want more or it is unclear) so summed up, I believe in God because I have had experiences in my life where my prayers have been answered. Also, the alternative story just does not seem to hold any water for me. I just can't bring myself to believe that it all happened by chance. ~Katara~ |
|
Orophin
No life Poster
Crikey! Dragon of the South, mate.
Posts: 44,407
|
Post by Orophin on Sept 13, 2008 17:14:37 GMT 1
The point being, that is what separates believing something from being religious about it. Sorry, I thought I was clearer than I was, apperantly...
So, why is the Bible reasonable evidence? What proves the Bible? What gives it credibility? Who wrote it? And how did they know everything in it?
As for the prayers, I think it would involve too much personal delving to rationally explain, so I'll drop that subject...
Of course, you didn't answer my question... Why should someone believe in God? From your answer, my guess would be that your claim has something to do with getting things you want. But, that wouldn't hold up, because you'd only get them if God existed, and the person you would be talking to would not believe that, other wise the argument would not be taking place.
Actually, studies show more relation to the Chimpanzee than other primates. And of course, it's not all about humans. Other species and their evolutionary lines have also become quite clear to anyone who's studied them enough. Besides, it's not far out if you think about it. In fact, it's way more simple than your explanation. Natural selection, passing on of traits, it all seems confusing if looked at from afar. But look at the components, and it's incredibly simple.
How do you know it has made a difference? That's a pure assumption right there...
But your theory also involves life forming out of nonliving matter... life is physical, and has been physically explained. However, your theory has bodies coming from... I dunno where, to house spirits, that were once just intelligence, and have always existed. All JUST for humans? And yet, we have bodies so similar to that of animals. We've found evidence of shared ancestors with them. My point, of course, is that your point is trying to point out flaws in one theory that yours shares.
What?? That's your argument? That's just... barely even acceptable as a sentence, let alone a fact or an argument.
Well, maybe that's because you're exaggerating the chances. I mean, think about it. A single primate is born with an irregular spine, and it walks on it's hind legs. This enables it to run faster. Hence, it doesn't get killed. Hence, it mates. And hence, it passes on the trait. This continues. Then, in this new species of primates, one is born with long legs. This enables it to run even faster, so it too survives and passes on this long-legged trait. Continue this, adding thing such as larger brains, furlessness, and then have it culminate in Africa, where the first true human is known to have been, (Thanks to fossil evidence. As in, the skeletons of said humans) 200,000 years ago. All of Africa was colonised by small groups of Humans, they eventually leave and find their way to other places. Fast forward to now.
Or, of course, your theory. We've somehow always existed as intelligence (with no explaination, of course), and are then turned into spirits for some reason. Then, we inhabit bodes which were formed for us. Out of what, I don't know, but apperantly we don't need to.
Or, maybe you dispute the odds of a planet being able to support life? Maybe you think that it's too big a coincidence that this planet has the right amount of atmosphere and is the right distance away from a start to support life. Maybe you don't take into account the billions of other planets that are unable to. Maybe you just need to stop thinking "Hey, this is impossible because it's unlikely, I mean, what are the odds? " and start thinking "Aow, and there's not yet any ecidence of life on other planets, out of the billions there are? What are the odds...?"
Isn't that what you do with the Bible? I mean, you didn't write it. You didn't think of any of it yourself. So, that means you're basing your beleif on it, which according to what you just wrote, is crazy. I mean, why is the Bible an exception?
Well, that might have been a good point... if I had not been a curious child. I tested out faith in my time. I tried asking, and I got my answer. Eventually, just to prove something to myself, I created an ultimatum. Either something (which I can't remember) be done by Him as was asked by me, or I would conclude that He did not exist, and would stop even entertaining the idea. So, either He couldn't care less, or He doesn't exist. Either way, I stayed true to my word... and have not since considered even the possibility of "God".
But, doesn't that defeat the purpose of him being God? I mean, if he isn't a SINGLE supreme being, then isn't his purpose... unpurposful? And besides, what makes anyone beleive anything like that at all? Has someone died then just decided to come back and tell everyone what it's like? How can we simply assume that any of these things can happen? Answer, we can't. Not without doing nothing better than dreaming.
Well, for one thing, if someone who "loved" me let someone torture and kill me, then I'd hate them. I would not accept "Oh, don't worry, it was just a test" as an excuse.
Now, although some people make the mistake of saying "Why does God allow bad things to happen?", I wont. My question is, "Why does God make bad things happen?". I mean, if he is all powerful, then he can cause or stop a flood or a tornado. If he is all good, then why, pray tell, would he allow innocent people to die in such events? Perhaps, as some claim, it is punichment for sin... Well, what about babies and the like? They haven't done anything wrong. And of course, he can't be all good if he is punishing them for other's sins. So how can he be both all good and all powerful? How can he be God if such things happen? Simply put, he can't...
"Oh, I had a reason for killing your baby/letting them die in that storm. It is too complicated for you to understand, though"
The above would be Gods feeble exuse to a mother who died of greif...
So, in summation, He can;t exist if he is both all powerful and all good, so either he isn't all good, or he doesn't have the power people think He does.
|
|
Teяa253
No life Poster
I am amazing. I know.
Posts: 70,114
|
Post by Teяa253 on Sept 13, 2008 18:37:19 GMT 1
The point being, that is what separates believing something from being religious about it. Sorry, I thought I was clearer than I was, apperantly... seldom is that the case. =3 So, why is the Bible reasonable evidence? What proves the Bible? What gives it credibility? Who wrote it? And how did they know everything in it? why is the Bible reasonable evidence? the same reason science books are "reasonable evidence" for evolution. how did they know it? well, there's no way for us in modern days to completely prove anything that happened before our time, but most likely firsthand experience. unless by chance everyone who contributed to the Bible was a really great fiction writer. As for the prayers, I think it would involve too much personal delving to rationally explain, so I'll drop that subject... this might be part of why all my sayings seem to be off whack, but I'll let it slide for now. Of course, you didn't answer my question... Why should someone believe in God? From your answer, my guess would be that your claim has something to do with getting things you want. But, that wouldn't hold up, because you'd only get them if God existed, and the person you would be talking to would not believe that, other wise the argument would not be taking place. God does give poeple what they want to a certain extent. just like regular parents do. similarly, you don't get everything you want. plain and simple. Actually, studies show more relation to the Chimpanzee than other primates. And of course, it's not all about humans. Other species and their evolutionary lines have also become quite clear to anyone who's studied them enough. Besides, it's not far out if you think about it. In fact, it's way more simple than your explanation. Natural selection, passing on of traits, it all seems confusing if looked at from afar. But look at the components, and it's incredibly simple. monkey, chimps, you get my point. and actually, the creation explanation is much, much more simple. "God created it". that's about as simple as it gets. if you want to delve a little deeper, you can say God made us out of what we're made of today. oh, and of course, by "created" I mean, "organized" again. (it's like saying "I created the empire state building out of these LEGOS" you didn't "create" the Empire State Building, you formed it) How do you know it has made a difference? That's a pure assumption right there... not in the slightest ('coz it's my life. =P ) because I've gone without praying before and noticed a difference. just in my general surroundings. I've heard others with similar stories. I mean, I've heard of coincidences, but that many people saying the same thing as I did makes me wonder... But your theory also involves life forming out of nonliving matter... life is physical, and has been physically explained. However, your theory has bodies coming from... I dunno where, to house spirits, that were once just intelligence, and have always existed. All JUST for humans? And yet, we have bodies so similar to that of animals. We've found evidence of shared ancestors with them. My point, of course, is that your point is trying to point out flaws in one theory that yours shares. but it wasn't a shared theory. and no, just like humans have those "intelligences" so do animals, just on lower levels. and yes, we believe that like God, those intelligences always existed. God simply created the bodies etc. so when we die, the body again becomes non-living matter. the intelligences were the "living matter" What?? That's your argument? That's just... barely even acceptable as a sentence, let alone a fact or an argument. whoops. comp slipped or something. =P what it should have said is "except perhaps that some things in life are just not meant for us to know."Well, maybe that's because you're exaggerating the chances. I mean, think about it. A single primate is born with an irregular spine, and it walks on it's hind legs. This enables it to run faster. Hence, it doesn't get killed. Hence, it mates. And hence, it passes on the trait. This continues. Then, in this new species of primates, one is born with long legs. This enables it to run even faster, so it too survives and passes on this long-legged trait. Continue this, adding thing such as larger brains, furlessness, and then have it culminate in Africa, where the first true human is known to have been, (Thanks to fossil evidence. As in, the skeletons of said humans) 200,000 years ago. All of Africa was colonised by small groups of Humans, they eventually leave and find their way to other places. Fast forward to now. maybe that theory holds a little water, but I was mostly talking about the beginning of the universe and how earth is in just the right place to support life, and, most importantly, how that life began form nonliving matter. Or, of course, your theory. We've somehow always existed as intelligence (with no explaination, of course), and are then turned into spirits for some reason. Then, we inhabit bodes which were formed for us. Out of what, I don't know, but apperantly we don't need to. well, I can't remember whose Law it was, but some scientist once said "Matter cannot be created nor destroyed" therefore, it has always been there. and therefore, God made us out of what we're made of today. oh, and of course, by "created" I mean, "organized" again. (it's like saying "I created the empire state building out of these LEGOS" you didn't "create" the Empire State Building, you formed it) Or, maybe you dispute the odds of a planet being able to support life? Maybe you think that it's too big a coincidence that this planet has the right amount of atmosphere and is the right distance away from a start to support life. Maybe you don't take into account the billions of other planets that are unable to. Maybe you just need to stop thinking "Hey, this is impossible because it's unlikely, I mean, what are the odds? " and start thinking "Aow, and there's not yet any ecidence of life on other planets, out of the billions there are? What are the odds...?" it's a huge universe, and once again your closed-mindedness is showing up again. we haven't explored the reaches of the universe. I'm pretty sure that we're not alone. maybe Earth WAS a coincidence, but do you honestly think that in this entire universe with billions of galaxies that we're the one place that has life? we have a lto to learn. Isn't that what you do with the Bible? I mean, you didn't write it. You didn't think of any of it yourself. So, that means you're basing your beleif on it, which according to what you just wrote, is crazy. I mean, why is the Bible an exception? I'm basing my belief in a God. I believe what he says and he has said that the Bible is true. simple. Well, that might have been a good point... if I had not been a curious child. I tested out faith in my time. I tried asking, and I got my answer. Eventually, just to prove something to myself, I created an ultimatum. Either something (which I can't remember) be done by Him as was asked by me, or I would conclude that He did not exist, and would stop even entertaining the idea. So, either He couldn't care less, or He doesn't exist. Either way, I stayed true to my word... and have not since considered even the possibility of "God". the only way I can really counter that would be to ask what you asked for. God's not going to hand everything to us on a silver platter. sometimes we have to put forth our own effort. "Lord I have done all I can do. now please help me." that's the attitude you need towards God to get the answers you seek. But, doesn't that defeat the purpose of him being God? I mean, if he isn't a SINGLE supreme being, then isn't his purpose... unpurposful? And besides, what makes anyone beleive anything like that at all? Has someone died then just decided to come back and tell everyone what it's like? How can we simply assume that any of these things can happen? Answer, we can't. Not without doing nothing better than dreaming. I never said anything about him being the single supreme being. in fact, if there really is a heavenly mother, then there's at least two of them. And I've said it before, but the answer would be to die and find out. case closed on that matter. some things we were just not meant to know in this life. (or if there is no afterlife, then ever) Well, for one thing, if someone who "loved" me let someone torture and kill me, then I'd hate them. I would not accept "Oh, don't worry, it was just a test" as an excuse. just like parents want you to grow up knowing how to handle yourself, God wants the same thing. Bad things are gonna happen to good people. it even happened in the *gasp* Bible! (Job) and yes, it was a test/trial, and if you can overcome it, he has said there are rewards in heaven laid up in store for you. Now, although some people make the mistake of saying "Why does God allow bad things to happen?", I wont. My question is, "Why does God make bad things happen?". I mean, if he is all powerful, then he can cause or stop a flood or a tornado. If he is all good, then why, pray tell, would he allow innocent people to die in such events? Perhaps, as some claim, it is punichment for sin... Well, what about babies and the like? They haven't done anything wrong. And of course, he can't be all good if he is punishing them for other's sins. So how can he be both all good and all powerful? How can he be God if such things happen? Simply put, he can't... that's almost the same pathetic argument. when God say, takes a baby, it is (a) because that spirit has a mission for him in heaven, and (b) perhaps to give the family a trial to overcome. God or no God, life has trials. "Oh, I had a reason for killing your baby/letting them die in that storm. It is too complicated for you to understand, though" rofl rofl rofl... it's NOT too complicated to understand... the EXACT reasoning might be, but the basic concept is simple. God has a purpose for everyone... those that live short earth lives have missions of some sort in heaven. The above would be Gods feeble exuse to a mother who died of greif... luckily that's not his excuse then, eh? So, in summation, He can;t exist if he is both all powerful and all good, so either he isn't all good, or he doesn't have the power people think He does. God lets everyone have their agency, including Satan. death does not end someone's life forever, it merely brings them back with him for various purposes (and I can explain what some of those might be if necessary) so yes, God will sometimes "kill" good people. in God's plan, death is merely another step, and in various scriptural places he has said that you will see those people again. assuming God never lies, there's the answer. |
|
Orophin
No life Poster
Crikey! Dragon of the South, mate.
Posts: 44,407
|
Post by Orophin on Sept 14, 2008 14:42:52 GMT 1
Or they were deluded... or they knew that the creation of religion could be an incredibly good thing for the people at large. It gives people a reason to be good, and helps stop them from feeling as unimportant. Of course, different religions have different reasons for their creation, but that's the general gist.
Now, as for the bible being in any way similar to a science book, I think I'd like to ask you to look at one. *Note: A "science book" does not include any relating to the explanation of theories, only those relating to proven or accepted facts*
But then, he isn't like a parent at all. For one thing, he would kind of have to prove that he is there for us to have any kind of relationship with him. Kinda like why I never believed in Santa or the monster under the bed... I never "loved Santa" or feared "the boogie man" or whatever it is nowadays... I always waited before knowing something/someone before making any judgments. Of course, had said monster shown itself, I would probably have begun a relationship with it. (Of fear, of course, lol).
And if Santa had appeared with a beard that doesn't come off when you pull it (that was a funny Christmas, involving my dad and a photo oppurtunity...) then I would have begun a different one with the jolly gift-giving magic man...
Of course, neither of those people/whatever ever showed themselves, so either they didn't/don't exist, or they do/did and they don't give a damn about any kind of relationship with me. The same with God. If he appears, or at the very least proves to me that he's there, then I'll be all too happy to get some sort of feeling towards him. But, so far he hasn't, so I'm forced to come to the same conclusion.
But that raises the infinite loop question, who created/organized God? And if your argument is that he did it, then you're just being illogical.
Besides, why not have some sort of super-God who did that? It also creates an endless loop, all to explain away another loop.
In that case, it sounds mental. Not "crazy" mental, but "in your mind" mental. People feel better when they pray, which causes a good mood. I can personally say that being in a good mood makes bad things seem better, and good things seem awesome, even if nothing's changed.
Matter isn't living or non-living. Life is merely measured by electrical signals and chemical reactions that cause an effect in an organism being produced by the organism itself. That's why plants are alive, when they obviously have no intelligence or feelings.
Well, in that case I'll take part the "sentence" part...
Again, you assume that matter can live. It can't. Matter is something completely different. Matter is basically all physical stuff. I explained life earlier.
Now, as for life existing, it's kinda stupid to think that it's coincidental. I mean, life is merely one phenomenon. The reason it is here is because this planet is the right one. It easily couldn't have been, true, but another planet elsewhere might then have. There are a lot of planets out there, you know. If it had happened on one of them, then we'd be there, wondering "Hey, why not some other planet? Why here? *Gasp* Of course! Divine intervention!"
But Lego bricks are made, aren't they? So using that example, someone had to "form" the matter we're made of. Lego bricks did not "always" exist. And, as they were made by a construction machine, could not matter have been made by the Big Bang?
Well, people outside of Earth goes against the bible, doesn't it? I don't recall any mention of any other planet holding life. So, either the bible is wrong, or the bible doesn't tell you everything, and is thus incomplete, and an incomplete source isn't very good rounds for a belief.
Hence experiments like the one discussed on this thread. We have much to learn, so we do. If you're hungry, you eat, if you're tired, you sleep, and if you have something to learn, you learn it.
Well, as he never told me the bible was true, then your argument holds no water with me...
So, we have to try to do something for it to happen? How convenient...
Wouldn't He know that we would do it if it wasn't given? And, knowing this, wouldn't he save us the trouble? Surely He's smart enough to figure that out...
Who says we're not meant to know? Why are we not meant to know? Why do we, mankind, want to know things, if we're never supposed to know them? Answer, "meant" is misleading. We weren't meant to do anything, know anything or be anything. We just do it ourselves. We weren't "created" this way. We weren't even "formed" or "organized" this way. We are this way because we became it ourselves.
But would a parent take something from their child, to suit their wants, and to test them. Then, if you pass, it gets cheapened by some kind of reward?
Here's the scenario in parental terms. You love the saxophone. You are talented at playing said saxophone. However, you are also talented at other music, and your father has always wanted you to be a rapper. So, he steals your saxophone, chops it up, sells some of it and melts down the rest. He also knows that this will be a god test of character. If you can deal with it, he then gives you a gift. It's some "bing". Made, of course, from your melted down saxophone...
Kinda the same as God taking your baby, for his "plan", and to test you. But of course, in the end, your baby was still taken.
And why would we assume that? I mean, wouldn't He know that sometimes it is better to lie to someone you love? Or is he above lying?
Wait a minute... he'd have to talk to be able to lie, and he's never spoken to me. Apparently, he talks through others. They, of course, are humans, who are not above lying. So, the only way to know is if He himself spoke to me. Signs can be misread, people he talks through can lie, but as He is above such things, if he appeared before me and spoke, then I would have a reason to believe something.
Anyway, I'm sorry that I didn't go into detail this time, and that I only half-argued. Had kind of a nonplussed attitude about it for some reason...
|
|
Teяa253
No life Poster
I am amazing. I know.
Posts: 70,114
|
Post by Teяa253 on Sept 14, 2008 20:22:42 GMT 1
Or they were deluded... or they knew that the creation of religion could be an incredibly good thing for the people at large. It gives people a reason to be good, and helps stop them from feeling as unimportant. Of course, different religions have different reasons for their creation, but that's the general gist. or perhaps the people that don't believe did not want to believe because they didn't want to have to have that sort of responsibility. Now, as for the bible being in any way similar to a science book, I think I'd like to ask you to look at one. *Note: A "science book" does not include any relating to the explanation of theories, only those relating to proven or accepted facts* "well, I've held books before, and let me tell you, they just don't do it for me" I've read several science books, some teaching me about the Big Bang and Evolution. and while I believe some of what they say, other things I do not. I'm not that closed-minded. But then, he isn't like a parent at all. For one thing, he would kind of have to prove that he is there for us to have any kind of relationship with him. Kinda like why I never believed in Santa or the monster under the bed... I never "loved Santa" or feared "the boogie man" or whatever it is nowadays... I always waited before knowing something/someone before making any judgments. Of course, had said monster shown itself, I would probably have begun a relationship with it. (Of fear, of course, lol). And if Santa had appeared with a beard that doesn't come off when you pull it (that was a funny Christmas, involving my dad and a photo oppurtunity...) then I would have begun a different one with the jolly gift-giving magic man... well, the last time I told you how to "find" God (the whole bit about prayer), you said you were gonna drop the subject. as a result, subject dropped. Of course, neither of those people/whatever ever showed themselves, so either they didn't/don't exist, or they do/did and they don't give a damn about any kind of relationship with me. The same with God. If he appears, or at the very least proves to me that he's there, then I'll be all too happy to get some sort of feeling towards him. But, so far he hasn't, so I'm forced to come to the same conclusion. God's not gonna be showing signs to people who wouldn't give jack crap. similarly, you need to open your mind and realize that he's not gonna hand everything to you on a silver platter. finding the answer to anything is not always gonna be easy. from what you keep saying, you act like it should be. But that raises the infinite loop question, who created/organized God? And if your argument is that he did it, then you're just being illogical. no, not at all. out of all the intelligences, God was the only one with enough "intelligence" to organize himself, and he subsequently organized us. I mean, take the scientists of the LHC (since that actually goes a little back on the original topic). can you build that? can I? no we cannot. we might have the ability to learn how to build it, but at the current time, we do not have that capability. it fits right in there with my theory of us being able to become like Him. Besides, why not have some sort of super-God who did that? It also creates an endless loop, all to explain away another loop. because God made himself. In that case, it sounds mental. Not "crazy" mental, but "in your mind" mental. People feel better when they pray, which causes a good mood. I can personally say that being in a good mood makes bad things seem better, and good things seem awesome, even if nothing's changed. that's not always true. I've been angry, and I prayed and guess what? nothing happened. God only listens to prayers that are done with sincerity and an open mind. perhaps if you really did ask God one time if He existed, you lacked one or both of those attributes. I can clearly see you still lack the 2nd one, but that's even more off topic, so I'll drop it and remain with the first one (which is actually more important) "if it ain't sincere, God ain't gonna hear." plain and simple. Matter isn't living or non-living. Life is merely measured by electrical signals and chemical reactions that cause an effect in an organism being produced by the organism itself. That's why plants are alive, when they obviously have no intelligence or feelings. but even if this was the case, that still does not answer where it comes from. Well, in that case I'll take part the "sentence" part... clearly more evidence of a closed and sealed mind. *yawns* I'm dropping the subject for now. Again, you assume that matter can live. It can't. Matter is something completely different. Matter is basically all physical stuff. I explained life earlier. but that is merely what you think it is. and yeah, I'm aware that matter is the physical stuff. the body is the stuff stuff, and the spirit is the "living" stuff. I believe that God knows all his creations, even down to the last bacteria. Now, as for life existing, it's kinda stupid to think that it's coincidental. I mean, life is merely one phenomenon. The reason it is here is because this planet is the right one. It easily couldn't have been, true, but another planet elsewhere might then have. There are a lot of planets out there, you know. If it had happened on one of them, then we'd be there, wondering "Hey, why not some other planet? Why here? *Gasp* Of course! Divine intervention!" precisely. I love how your sarcastic remark was your first intelligent one. shows a little bit of open-mindedness. ^^ But Lego bricks are made, aren't they? So using that example, someone had to "form" the matter we're made of. Lego bricks did not "always" exist. And, as they were made by a construction machine, could not matter have been made by the Big Bang? nope. matter always existed. when I say God "created" things, I mean that he "formed" them. matter has no beginning nor end. it has always been here and always will be. So no, the Big Bang could not have created matter, especially not if a God who is supposed to be "all-powerful" cannot. Well, people outside of Earth goes against the bible, doesn't it? I don't recall any mention of any other planet holding life. So, either the bible is wrong, or the bible doesn't tell you everything, and is thus incomplete, and an incomplete source isn't very good rounds for a belief. keep in mind that they didn't have spaceships in their times. they didn't have the space exploration technology we have, so they were limited to that part of the universe (or of the world) they knew about. And God DID say that he created "worlds without number". hmm... sounds like God was aware that there might be life on other planets... Hence experiments like the one discussed on this thread. We have much to learn, so we do. If you're hungry, you eat, if you're tired, you sleep, and if you have something to learn, you learn it. Now our only task is to discern truths from falsehoods. Well, as he never told me the bible was true, then your argument holds no water with me... sounds like a personal (closed-minded) problem to me. So unless you asked him (which I highly doubt you did) you wouldn't know. Again, you're acting like God is supposed to give you everything on a silver platter. where's the logic in that? So, we have to try to do something for it to happen? How convenient... Wouldn't He know that we would do it if it wasn't given? And, knowing this, wouldn't he save us the trouble? Surely He's smart enough to figure that out... wow... only about the 8th time where you have basically asked "why doesn't God hand it all to me on a silver platter?" do teachers just come up to you and give you the answers? no they don't. is God gonna come waltzing down to give you the answer? no he isn't. do teachers help and guide you if you ask and put forth some effort? yes they do. God works the same way. Honestly, you're about to get me writing a book about 1001 different ways to ask the same d4mn thing. Who says we're not meant to know? Why are we not meant to know? Why do we, mankind, want to know things, if we're never supposed to know them? Answer, "meant" is misleading. We weren't meant to do anything, know anything or be anything. We just do it ourselves. We weren't "created" this way. We weren't even "formed" or "organized" this way. We are this way because we became it ourselves. sounds like my "free-agency" principle actually. and who said anything about "never" knowing them? oh wait... I did *slaps forehead* I guess I forgot to elaborate. I said that some things were never meant to be, and when I did, I meant some things were not meant to be in this life. If God said that we can become like him and have a perfect understanding, the maybe then we will know these things. But would a parent take something from their child, to suit their wants, and to test them. Then, if you pass, it gets cheapened by some kind of reward? Here's the scenario in parental terms. You love the saxophone. You are talented at playing said saxophone. However, you are also talented at other music, and your father has always wanted you to be a rapper. So, he steals your saxophone, chops it up, sells some of it and melts down the rest. He also knows that this will be a god test of character. If you can deal with it, he then gives you a gift. It's some "bing". Made, of course, from your melted down saxophone... bing? WTF? Kinda the same as God taking your baby, for his "plan", and to test you. But of course, in the end, your baby was still taken. the thing is, we know what the reward is. for one thing, up there, earthly things will not matter, for we will not need them. What is this reward? the "reward" is eternal life in one of 3 degrees of glory (or hell). so the better you are, the higher your glory. and if God takes a family member, you will see them again. That leads to my analogy. say a parent gets you a new toy. then they take it away, and after tests/trials/whatever they give it back. Yes, it is possible for families to be reuinited after death. And why would we assume that? I mean, wouldn't He know that sometimes it is better to lie to someone you love? Or is he above lying? no. God uses the same argument I use a lot as Roy. "sometimes the truth hurts". besides, if he is "all good" then he can't lie. Wait a minute... he'd have to talk to be able to lie, and he's never spoken to me. I can see why. =3 (see next argument) Apparently, he talks through others. They, of course, are humans, who are not above lying. God just doesn't choose random schmuck #3 to be a prophet. he chooses people based on their righteousness. And if one of his prophets DOES lie, God removes them. So, the only way to know is if He himself spoke to me. Signs can be misread, people he talks through can lie, but as He is above such things, if he appeared before me and spoke, then I would have a reason to believe something. have you tried asking? was it sincere? was it open-minded? again, this is that same prayer principle that you wanted to skip over. Interestingly enough, there is a scripture (an excerpt of one at least) that says something like that. "for ye shall receive no witness until after the trial of your faith."I think I found your problem. Anyway, I'm sorry that I didn't go into detail this time, and that I only half-argued. Had kind of a nonplussed attitude about it for some reason... not a problem. in fact, I strongly recommend you "half-argue" again. these arguments have been your best yet. ~Sanaki~ |
|
ᴃᴇᴇ♥
Avatar State Master
Yes, Im a wannabe nerd.
Posts: 4,036
|
Post by ᴃᴇᴇ♥ on Sept 16, 2008 8:22:17 GMT 1
Dang guys.. -.- !!!
Anyway.. remember when ppl said that year 2000 would be the end of the world ? LAWLROFLCOPTER !!.. Never happened..
And now '"they" claim something BIG will happen in 2012.. -.-
Yeah right, like babies gunna get telepathic abilities...
Give me a break..
|
|
Orophin
No life Poster
Crikey! Dragon of the South, mate.
Posts: 44,407
|
Post by Orophin on Sept 28, 2008 17:46:43 GMT 1
Rofl, yeah, that was a load of bull...
(Oh, and as to why I stopped posting here, I just kinda realised that psuedo-science can't be fought...)
|
|
Teяa253
No life Poster
I am amazing. I know.
Posts: 70,114
|
Post by Teяa253 on Sept 28, 2008 19:53:44 GMT 1
Dang guys.. -.- !!! Anyway.. remember when ppl said that year 2000 would be the end of the world ? LAWLROFLCOPTER !!.. Never happened.. And now '"they" claim something BIG will happen in 2012.. -.- Yeah right, like babies gunna get telepathic abilities... Give me a break.. yeah, that just shows how intelligent scientists are... lol. that might convert me to believe that they in particular really DID evolve from monkeys. rofl. Rofl, yeah, that was a load of bull... (Oh, and as to why I stopped posting here, I just kinda realised that psuedo-science can't be fought...) or perhaps you ran out of excuses? I'd believe that much easier... ~Azula~ |
|
Orophin
No life Poster
Crikey! Dragon of the South, mate.
Posts: 44,407
|
Post by Orophin on Sept 29, 2008 9:49:09 GMT 1
You'd beleive anything.
I mean, I could argue a better case for the fact that dogs are spies from Venus than you can for your beleif system...
|
|
Teяa253
No life Poster
I am amazing. I know.
Posts: 70,114
|
Post by Teяa253 on Sept 29, 2008 9:55:21 GMT 1
nah, you're just arrogant, like all Atheists are... and arrogance blinds your arguing abilities pretty well. you couldn't convince me of anything even if you tried....  ~Azula~ |
|
Orophin
No life Poster
Crikey! Dragon of the South, mate.
Posts: 44,407
|
Post by Orophin on Sept 29, 2008 9:57:55 GMT 1
That's because it's impossible to work around psuedo-science... however, I figure I don't need to, as your arguments never go anywhere.
|
|
Teяa253
No life Poster
I am amazing. I know.
Posts: 70,114
|
Post by Teяa253 on Sept 29, 2008 10:01:23 GMT 1
no, it's impossible to work around someone with such a closed mind...
I will admit though that I did look at some of your points really clearly... it made me have to delve deep into principles of not only my religion, but also unanswered questions and my own personal beliefs...
you see, unlike you, I'm not trying to flat out say that there's a God.
you on the other hand, are trying to flat-out do the opposite--sign #2 of a closed and ignorant mind.
~Azula~
|
|
