Right! After I posted I thought maybe you were being sarcastic. But sometimes some crazy stuff appears on these boards.
As for the world being flat, don't get me started! Of course the world is flat!
Printable View
Right! After I posted I thought maybe you were being sarcastic. But sometimes some crazy stuff appears on these boards.
As for the world being flat, don't get me started! Of course the world is flat!
i think the biggest flaw in ID is that the bible makes NO MENTION OF IT and due to the last 100 years since darwin managed to escape the indoctrination of religon and form his own theories on evidence not on an anecdotale book, that gets a rewrite every 500 years. Religon had to come up with something to counteract the truth.
The church and religous people as always only attact thing that make them look wrong, out dated and hypocritical. such as gay people, evolution, abortion, stem cell research. however domestic abuse, global warming, helping the meek, weak and lost. Nah fuck them they would destroy the very foundations we operate from
Well we pretty much know that everything that exists involved energy, correct? Thunder, life, whatever you want to come up with... it all had to start somewhere and something had to fuel it, and whatever that spark was, I'm pretty sure we're attributing that to God. Whatever God is, he/she/it has the power to create. Making something from nothing has to have an explanation behind it, and intelligent design seems legitimate to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf_The_Grey
Also, is it better to believe in something in this life or to believe that you'll never know what that something is? I'd rather live with faith, personally.
Let's say, hypothetically, that there wasn't a God. Don't you think that the norms and morals associated with faith are beneficial to society anyway? Not the extremists, but those that try to have reasonably good intentions?
Without any faith, I think like a lot more people would feel like they've got nothing to lose.
...upset??? Yeah, you're right. That immature and mundane statement you made has reeeealy shaken my faith! You horrible, horrible atheists...:mad:Quote:
Originally Posted by BeforeYourTime
By the way, if atheism is working out so well for you, why are you so angry all the time? Shouldn't you generally be carefree and positive? You seem to be spending an awful lot of your time attempting to offend a Christian, and failing miserably. Does that have something to do with it? That's probably not healthy.
...and you can state your beliefs all you want around here. That's what people do. You just seem to do it less articulately than others.
No offense! :thumbsup:
The Bible is a load of shit. Seriously, Christians are diabolical. They openly accept SOME sections that their moral subconscious agrees with as "holy", but then fail to fuckin mention the obviously racist and draconian stories and prophecies that other parts are littered with.
What the fuck. Leviticus anyone? Read THAT shit, and then tell me if you think the Bible is all good and proper. Its a fucking bazillion page book with so much shit in it that you could justify ANYTHING. Christians will never ever mention Mark 7: 24-30. Seriously look it up.
To the guy above. Atheists are pissed off cause for many of us, we have had religion pushed upon us for our whole lives, from Birth, through preschool and school, and into adult society. The whole science-religion thing is stupid. Religious people should just keep their beliefs and the same goes for scientists. There's no need to try and combat eachothers' ideas because neither side will ever prove to be correct. You can have all the answers already if you like, but dont call me a sinner if I dont believe, k?
Seriously, I think you need a sedative! That post was a little hyper.Quote:
Originally Posted by BathingApes
Done. Forgot all about that one.Quote:
Originally Posted by BathingApes
...what's your point?
-P.S.-
I never called you a sinner, and I'm sorry if some overzealous Christians have tried imposing their religion on you by force. I'm not that kind of Christian, and I don't know of very many who are.
Welcome to life? You have things pushed on you. That's how it works. It's funny that you're all whiny about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by BathingApes
Maybe nothing should have been pushed on you. Maybe nobody should have ever taken the time to socialize you.
Who cares if you're a sinner with respect to the Bible or religion? You sound like a sack of shit either way.
lmao, who lets these people on the internet?
I knew someone would hit me with the "that's life" bullshit. What points have you actually made there? I was arguing, albeit rather aggressively, that the Bible is so vast that any act good or bad can be justified with its text. My point is that we have a dilemma - is it fair to teach a child of 3, 4, 5 whatever age that there is 100% a God? Is it right to teach them that there isn't? In my opinion, no. I dont have a problem with religious people unless they try and make other people religious.Quote:
Originally Posted by meatw4d
Yet you say that having opinions unfairly pushed on you is a part of life we should accept? I disagree. Sure it happens, but why should anyone stand for it? For years of my life I was under the impression that I would literally burn for eternity if I didn't do good. I believed that because that is what I was told to believe. Is that morally acceptable though? Do you teach morals via fear or education?
And I sound like a sack of shit? As long as you dont throw me in a sack and fill it with excrement I'm fine with you saying that.
P.S.
And you know Clandestine you do make a good point. My issue is rather with the people that say the entire Bible is the word of God you get the picture? If you use it as a sort of guide to life and make decisions by its good teachings then there is nothing negative in that. When I said Christians, I actually meant "Fundamentalist" Christians. My issue isn't with you.
Understood. I didn't take it personally.Quote:
Originally Posted by BathingApes
As for young children, though...just as you are entitled to impart your own beliefs and systems of values, morals, etc., onto your own children, Christian parents should also be given the same luxury. Parents should never be forceful when teaching their beliefs, and again, I apologize if you had an upbringing with a strict Christian influence. Conversely, I was brought up with practically no religious influence, remained an agnostic for twenty years or so, and still ended up choosing this as my faith.
I remember the few who did try to force Christianity on me when I refused to believe, and to this day I still despise them. It's not because of the religion they chose, but because of the kind of people they were - i.e., arrogant, self-righteous, and pompous assholes.
Ok, good point Apes. You did come off rather strongly at first, so that's why I took you for some douche, lol.
True, the Bible is vast. Maybe I was lucky enough to have parents that taught me to think logically and to interpret the good book reasonably. In my opinion, life is about being a good person, and not taking things to extremes.
I don't like to admit it, but I do think that the idea of burning in a fiery eternity has kept me from doing things that I would probably be regretting now.
On another note,
We learned in sociology that until age 7 or 10 (i don't remember exactly), children aren't able to put themselves in other people's shoes yet or think entirely in a moral sense. Until then, fear of punishment is what keeps them from breaking the rules. That's probably why religion is forced upon them at a young age. Until you're a teenager, you don't really have the capacity to think about the true right/wrong, the meaning of life, or any of that.
I once heard this put another way by a Muslim. "Because every movement requires a prior action, there must have been an original, eternal, unmoveable mover". I think that's a fine hypothesis. But that's where I find it illogical, assuming it's correct, to attribute this "unmovable mover" to God. God is this being of whom we attribute human characteristics; consciousness, compassion, jealousy, angry, love. These are all products of biological beings that exist as a result of DNA and a complex asortment of minerals and chemical reactions. Why should they suddenly occure independently of these so-far-necessary factors?Quote:
Originally Posted by meatw4d
If god doesn't have these attributes, why call it God? Or, why not call it God, but maybe then "God" isn't a being to be worshipped, only a unique singularity that caused a chain reaction of events.
It is legitimate; a legitimate hypothesis. "How'd this happen? Here's an idea...." To me it takes the mystery out of life when you stop at the first idea we can think of, when there could be incredibly ideas out there so amazing our brains cannot yet formulate them! To me it hinders this process of discovery to stop at the simple answer, even though we're far from any conclusive evidence.Quote:
Whatever God is, he/she/it has the power to create. Making something from nothing has to have an explanation behind it, and intelligent design seems legitimate to me.
Try deep introspective meditation some time, maybe even with Salvia as I do once in a while. Sometimes answer can come to you that you wouldn't have even considered. Even if they don't, it is rewarding merely to strive for them.
I'd rather not jump to assumptions just to satsify my need to know. The Universe is an incredible and complex place full of mystery, I wouldn't dare be so arrogant as to claim to understand it all.Quote:
Also, is it better to believe in something in this life or to believe that you'll never know what that something is? I'd rather live with faith, personally.
Look at the 10 Commandments. "Thou shalt not kill", "Don't steal", "honor your parents". These are good morals, but they are not inventions of religion, only morals that religion adopted. The bible and such are a start, but there's a long way to go. The moral code held therein isn't perfect, I want to see a humanity that strives to seek knowledge and discover how we can transform this species of ours into something beautiful and free of suffering.Quote:
Let's say, hypothetically, that there wasn't a God. Don't you think that the norms and morals associated with faith are beneficial to society anyway? Not the extremists, but those that try to have reasonably good intentions?
And just because there's no belief in God, doesn't mean there's nothing to be had. The Buddhist philosophy is entirely independant of dieties of any sort. It is a philosophy of purifying ones mind, liberating ones self from ignorance and suffering, and bringing peace and compassion to all life you come in contact with. This is why I follow the philosophy personally.
I think you're right. Unfortunately a lot of people live trapped in ignorant mindsets, controlled by their impulses, perpetuating their own suffering and the suffering they impose upon others. For some, religion can help hugely with this, for others like myself we seek out philosophies that help us understand the world and our own nature, and for others still (myself included) we must find our own path. Religion, belief in God, undoubtedly helps millions of people and I'm glad for it. But when it comes right down to it, I'm most concerned with reality, not desire. It's a deeply held belief of mine that we need to understand reality to the deepest degree to master it and liberate ourselves from suffering, end harm to others.Quote:
Without any faith, I think like a lot more people would feel like they've got nothing to lose.
BathingApes, please keep it more respectful. I understand that it can be frustrating debating these issues, it can be for both sides. Whether or not you, me, or the Christians are right is beside the point. We need a world of compassion for our fellow lifeforms, we need to end the cycle that causes humans to harm each other.
24Jesus left that place and went to the vicinity of Tyre.[a] He entered a house and did not want anyone to know it; yet he could not keep his presence secret. 25In fact, as soon as she heard about him, a woman whose little daughter was possessed by an evil[b] spirit came and fell at his feet. 26The woman was a Greek, born in Syrian Phoenicia. She begged Jesus to drive the demon out of her daughter.Quote:
Originally Posted by BathingApes
27"First let the children eat all they want," he told her, "for it is not right to take the children's bread and toss it to their dogs."
28"Yes, Lord," she replied, "but even the dogs under the table eat the children's crumbs."
29Then he told her, "For such a reply, you may go; the demon has left your daughter."
30She went home and found her child lying on the bed, and the demon gone.
WHAT THE HELL
anyway i have a quote for all the christians out there that like to bash anythign that makes them question their faith
ahem
â??If any man among you seem to be religious, and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this man's religion is vain.â?
sums it all up and is the perfect counter
Exactly!
Look at that quote "for it is not right to take the children's bread and toss it to their dogs."
Jesus REFUSED at first to heal a girl because she was not Jewish. He compared the children of foreign non Jewish regions to be "dogs."
Some bringer of peace.
goodQuote:
Originally Posted by GraziLovesMary
when you first posted the reference, i looked it up and wonder "wtf, what does that mean?"Quote:
Originally Posted by BathingApes
so i'm wondering, how did you interpret it as you did? and how do you know your interpretation is correct?
I wouldn't have known about it if my old religion teacher hadn't mentioned it. It is in the context of the story. If you look at the bigger picture and read the entire thing, see how he has travelled to a non Jewish land, what else could it mean? A Gentile woman asks Jesus to heal her Gentile daughter, and he says along the lines of "why throw the childrens' food to the dogs" (the children of course being Jews and the dogs being non jews.)
The problem with the Bible is that it's worded in such a preachy way and riddled with metaphors that Christians can defend anything by saying "how do you know your interpretation is correct." Well I don't. But what I DO know is that that quote is obviously racist, I mean cmon, what else could it mean?
I don't have another interpretation, but I doubt that it can only be read one way.Quote:
Originally Posted by BathingApes
I don't think the Bible should ever be taken literally and you should be very skeptical of other people's interpretations because:
1. They could be wrong, and
2. The Bible has been translated, uh, how many times?
That is the entire point. I have no problem with the people that use its good teachings to make decisions or whatever, it's just you see over and over again these people justifying laws, actions, a whole load of stuff because they have been told the Bible is 100% true and 100% the word of God. There are also the people who get offended when you even entertain the idea that Jesus was racist, not just Jesus infact but any Biblical character.
I just have a problem with how much influence the Bible has. It's a book right? You said yourself it isn't meant to be taken literally. Even then, how am I supposed to take the sentence "If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put
to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives"
It gets to me when people are talking about the "Holy Bible" yet fail to see how incompatible it is with our modern society. Its a pick and choose thing. The Book that we swear over in court has sections that openly support the killing of homosexuals. Yet you would have me believe that's okay cause I'm not supposed to take it literally?
i took it on a literal meaning when i thought about it. that children (aka little people) need to be nourished and feed by us to be healthy. that it is not right to feed adn lavish your dog when your child goes un nourished. but it is ok to feed the dogs the crumbs as the children have had the majority of the food and so are fed. plus this saves on tiding up after the little fuckers.
the trouble with the bible is that it has been translated and reiterated so many times in the past milenia, it is hard to work it out. also time, context and social knowledge plays a great part in any literature. but becomes less relevent as time passes.
take for example the 80's
so if you then factor those 20 years difference and times that by 100 (2000 years ago) things are very distorted.
The Bible is used in court to give the people a reiterated sense that they should be telling the truth. Making an oath to God is very important to many people. This country was founded on Christian principles.
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowblind
That doesnt make sense in context with the actual statement. Who are the children and who are the dogs?
Do not give the Childrens' food to the dogs.
I think Jesus meant Children = Jews
Dogs = Gentiles
Whereas what youre saying has nothing to do with the situation in the Bible. If Jesus had meant it like that the transcript would go like this.
Woman: "Jesus please heal my daughter"
Jesus: "Never feed the childrens' food to the dogs because the children need nourishment more than animals."
That just wouldnt make any sense. Im not sure you fully understand the quotation. Either that or you think that Jesus meant the Jews needed it more not because of their religion but because of other circumstances. But then again, it isn't ACTUALLY food, its power, its never ending. It wastes a bit of time, but what's 5 seconds to the Son of God?
and why couldn't the children be children and dogs be dogs?
Because that would make absolutely no sense at all in that context.
Jesus can you heal my daughter!
Never feed food to your pets that was otherwise meant for the kids!
Sure that's a good idea but in this context, means fuck all.
Mark 7:24-30
"And from there He arose and went away to the region of Tyre. And when He had entered a house, He wanted no one to know of it; yet He could not escape notice. But after hearing of Him, a woman whose little daughter had an unclean spirit, immediately came and fell at His feet. Now the woman was a Gentile, of the Syrophoenician race. And she kept asking Him to cast the demon out of her daughter. And He was saying to her, 'Let the children be satisfied first, for it is not good to take the children's bread and throw it to the dogs.' But she answered and said to Him, 'Yes, Lord, but even the dogs under the table feed on the children's crumbs.' And He said to her, 'Because of this answer go your way; the demon has gone out of your daughter.' And going back to her home, she found the child lying on the bed, the demon having departed." (Mark 7:24-30)
Jesus saw faith in this woman, and made the decision to come to her aide based on her faith in God. Jesus saw the persecution she had suffered because of being a) a Gentile Jew (abhorred by mainstream and very religious Jews), and b) because she was a woman and regarded as inferior to the men. Jesus understood that she was still humble and not angry at the Jewish religion that was persecuting her, and that's how He came to know of this woman.
She was a Gentile - what mainstream and overly religious Jews at the time considered unclean, and were sometimes even referred to as dogs. Though Jesus wasn't calling her a dog, he was only making a reference to the gesture by saying that he had come for the children (Israelites - God's children), and that they would need to be fed before all else. It was a metaphor, not an insult. Jesus was referencing that it would be unwise to give all the good food to the pets before feeding the children. He was also stating that all others would be fed after the children. The Gentile woman showed great humility and diligence in saying that "even the dogs feed at the children's crumbs". Because of this, Jesus told the woman to return home to her daughter, who was now healed. She needed not wait, although she was willing to, and Jesus was pleased with her humble determination.
You're right that this could possibly have been interpreted in a manner that was condescending to the woman. Again, it was making a reference to the term "dogs", which was thrown around lightly by many hardcore Jews of the time. But again, this isn't how Jesus was referring to her. He was often considered the same, and many times far worse, to those same Jews.
Jesus is so convoluted and vague in his messages that he HAD to be the Son of God :)
It may be foolish to discount Jesus because the people who wrote the books of the Bible may have been vague...
Very few religions are direct and to the point when it comes to spiritual teachings. They're all full of alternate interpretations, hyperboles that may not be easy to recognize, and probably some mistranslations here and there. One of the great things about many religious scriptures is that they're left up for the reader to interpret...but this is also where arguments can pop up over differing interpretations.Quote:
Originally Posted by BathingApes
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Clandestine
And it's also where you get the fundamentalists justifying killing people.
i think that religon as a whole detracts from the meaning of spirituality. individuality and the spiritualness of the universe.
by putting faith in one being with knowledge you absolve yourelf of power and an ability to react and act
Luckily, you don't see very many Christians finding justification for murder in our Bible any more. While I guess there are probably a few that still do, there are bad seeds in any religion. Or, I guess I should say, there are bad seeds in humanity...not just the Christian faith.Quote:
Originally Posted by BathingApes
I still don't understand why people can get so irate with Christians over this, when there is a far more dangerous and hostile ideology out there that is currently using scripture to justify murder, rape, and hate. Why has it become socially taboo to denounce Islam? You want to read some literature that's violent, cruel, and one-sided? Read the Koran. Here's a book that advocates its followers "lying in wait to slaughter the unbelievers." While the interpretation of this could be construed differently, in most cases it is not. Followers take this, and many other similar passages, literally...and are more than willing to murder for their god. Hell, their "prophet" tells them to. He was a murderer, pedophile, rapist, and plunderer himself.
I study many religions, and am a practitioner of Mahayana (Greater Vehicle) Buddhism...as well as Christianity. I was actually a Buddhist before I really turned myself over to God. Regardless, I'm very fond of several Eastern religions, i.e. - Buddhism, Zen, Taoism, Shintoism, etc. Several of these ideologies were formed during times of civil strife and war, yet they preach compassion, understanding, and goodwill towards your fellow man. On top of this, I am a devout, but not fundamentalist, Christian. I won't stretch the words in the Bible to fit my own needs, I take them at face value and draw my own conclusions from my interpretation. There are many people of the same faith, who express the same goodwill towards others, and yet, at least in America, we are still the targets of unscrupulous and angry non-believers. If you're going to hate someone for what they believe, and not the person they are, then you should at least be considerate enough to take out your frustrations on others who'd be willing to chop your head off at the neck in retaliation.
...after all, that seems like it could become a much more exciting conversation. I'll only try to use peace and understanding in my rebuttals. Where's the excitement in that? :)
c'mon guys! you shouldnt be talking about these matters and asking such questions.. God will send you to hell... forever
Um.... Says who ?Quote:
Originally Posted by greenhorngrower
this may not be pretaining here but...
there is a movie about to be released called "the golden compass". this has raised a lot of controversy by the church mainly bcause the author, phillip pullman (from my understanding) is an aetheist. it has a lot of negativity about the church. the gist of it is that a group of people set out to destroy heaven. it illistrates how the church demeans and villifys truth when it contadicts the churches teachings.
i just finished the 3rd book of the trillogy and found it to be a very good story. it is infact all fiction but still makes a very good point about religion in general. go pick up a copy and read it, you can now get all 3 books in one called "his dark series". its a fantasy novel written (again from my understanding) for kids, but i have a hard time beleiving a child could understand the main storie
...God will send you to hell... forever
__________________
(The above post is completely fictional and/or hypothetical in nature. No posts made by me are to be taken seriously)
----
...gotta love the irony of that! :D
KENT HOVIND DUH DUH DUHQuote:
Originally Posted by The Marsh Wiggle
fuckers gonna burn like a vindaloo
Follow-Up:
Daily Manifestation!!!
The Flying Spaghetti Monster has appeared to us in a pumpkin pie. Bless his noodley appendages!
:hippy:
Non-believers should read my thread about Common Descent
So many of the arguments on this board are simply because people don't understand evolution.
Worth a watch....
BBC - Horizon - A War On Science (God vs Science) [2006]
I believe the largest flaw with Intelligent design is that it contradicts itself.
I could be wrong but I believe that intelligent design works on the idea that as beings we are too complex to have simply evolved and come into existance as we are today. This being said, if you believe this to be the case, I pose a question for you. Where did our creator (who has to be infinitely more powerful and complex than we are to design something as intricate as us) come from? He simply can't have come into existance because your arguement states that we couldn't have simply come into existance...so where'd he come from?