LBPCentral Archive

Home

General Stuff

General Chat

Religion Debate (potentially offensive)

Archive: 245 posts

Warning, anything you read beyond this point is likely to offend at least someone's beliefs. Enter with caution.

If this becomes a problem, I will accept responsibility and delete it.

--------

Hey there, friends. Now, I'm sure you all know me as a nice, considerate person, so you should know that I do not make this thread to alienate others or to generate hostilities. I only want to have a discussion about religion with some of the other intelligent members of this community.

I'll be straightforward: I'm an athiest (with agnostic leanings). At least in the general sense of the word. I was raised in a christian household, and it would kill my family to know this. I think there's a certain negative stigma attached to anyone with atheistic beliefs, but that's just how life goes.

Anyways, I would like to hear what you all think. I'll be sure to chime in once/if I get a response. Anyone who would claim themselves as a Christian, or otherwise, you are just as welcome. I'm sure this will waver towards a Christianity debate, but discussion of other religions are also welcome.

I will start the discussion of by posting a recent video in which Kirk Cameron offers to give out "Special Edition" copies of Darwin's Origin of Species. The "Special Edition" of it is a 50 page introduction, which sounds sketchy at best, but I'll let you figure that out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GN9zpf5cT0M

I have several points to make regarding the video, but I'd like to hear your thoughts first.

If you make any posts that are hostile or trolling in one direction or the other, I will make sure that your posts are removed. Please, I want to keep this discussion intelligent. If you haven't got anything to add, don't feel like you need to be part of the discussion.

--------------------

Update: If you are new to this thread, take this bit of advice from Syroc:

In any case the worst thing a religious person can do is disrespect another religion or even go as far as ridiculing it. They harm their own believe, moreover they are likely to disobey the rules set forth in their holy scripture. Most of them include the rule that you should respect other believes!
The same is true for people who do not follow a religious believe. Moreover anyone who claims that religion is unnecessary today, because we can explain everything through science, has not understood the importance of religion, that it helps people make sense of the world and gives them something to hold on to.
Religion itself is not harmful, what people make out of it can be harmful and potentially dangerous.
Therefor I think that the most sensible thing anyone can do is respect other people believes, try to understand their reasoning and give them all the freedom necessary to be religious and to live in accord with the rules their religion gives them. Banning certain aspects of a religion (ie headscarves) is not helpful if you want to live together, side by side in a society. At the same time religious people have to accept that not everyone can or wants to live in their way and they shouldn't be offended by it.

2009-11-06 23:28:00

Author:
comphermc

Posts: 5338

Ah, yes, this almost makes me wish Marino was here so that he could pretty much go commando XD

Ah well. Yep, I'm atheist too. Don't get me wrong, I WANT there to be some higher justice and purpose and a place to go after I die- I just refuse to believe there is a higher power just because it makes me feel better. I want to believe, but if one only believes because they say life is too terrible otherwise, well... that's not believing, that's using it as a cover.

Anyway... if only Killian's laptop wasn't broken

2009-11-06 23:31:00

Author:
RockSauron

Posts: 10882

Just a question, Rock. Were you raised with any particular religious background to speak of?

2009-11-06 23:34:00

Author:
comphermc

Posts: 5338

Born and raised a Catholic, here. Led and taught by instilling fear into my very bones from a very young age.

Grew up with many questions, and found out that religion wasn't the answer. For me, religion is only another way of controlling society.

I suppose right in the middle of science and religion is nature.

I've said enough.

2009-11-06 23:35:00

Author:
MrsSpookyBuz

Posts: 1492

Im an atheist. Done.

2009-11-06 23:38:00

Author:
CreateNPlay

Posts: 1266

Just a question, Rock. Were you raised with any particular religious background to speak of?

Born into Catholicism (mom's side is descended from Italians). Left it when I was in 6th grade because my mom divorced my dad when I was 3, and you know the Catholic beliefs on that :/

We grew to United Church of Christ, oh, when I was in 8th grade.

Went to church end of 9th grade (in 11th grade now) for confirmation, and went there once since- on Easter because my mom wanted me to.

I think talking to a few people here may have steered me towards Atheism, but anyway...

Yeah, I WANT to believe God exists... but no hokey pokey miracle can change my mind. TBQH, the fact that, in our day and age, the vast majority of society believes in God is kinda scary personally... but I digress ;-;

2009-11-06 23:40:00

Author:
RockSauron

Posts: 10882

I don't believe in anything. Atheism all the way, BABY.

I was raised to believe in what i wanted, i chose to believe in that which i can see, hear and feel, not that which people would have me believe exists.

Therefore, the only things you should worship are: Slash, Metallica, Iron Maiden, various other awesomesauce bands, and Jack Daniels.

2009-11-06 23:41:00

Author:
Unknown User

Rock on Ir0n!

2009-11-06 23:47:00

Author:
CreateNPlay

Posts: 1266

Not really part of this topic, but did anybody noticed the ads below this thread say something that's a bit connected to it? Like:

The Taco thread can have a Taco Bell ad.

So not really important, but the ad says something about religion, and it's kind of... well... ****** up.

2009-11-06 23:47:00

Author:
CyberSora

Posts: 5551

Grew up with many questions, and found out that religion wasn't the answer. For me, religion is only another way of controlling society.

Y'know, I've often thought this myself. I have this general belief that Christianity was embraced how it was for a couple of reasons:

It offers those who are subjected to the lesser lifestyle some sort of hope for their seemingly pathetic lives.
Those in power saw it as an easy way to control their subjects.

This is obviously a bit simplified from how I actually believe it 'went down', but it illustrates the point.

It should also be noted that Christianity was derived from a mystery religion during the times of the ancient Greeks. Kind of an odd little note in the history of Christianity.

2009-11-06 23:48:00

Author:
comphermc

Posts: 5338

Aethist with occasional leanings towards Agnostic. Heavy science upbringing in my house and forced to attend Luteran church by the grandparents for two years. I'd like to think we go on in some way but some cosmic babysitter.... nope not in my views of the universe.

2009-11-06 23:52:00

Author:
Morgana25

Posts: 5983

Aethist with occasional leanings towards Agnostic.

I think this is a better way of describing my beliefs. To be completely accurate, I'd have to say that I firmly believe Christianity is not the answer... There's just so much wrong with it...

I would have to say that no religion offers all the answers - that's just silly. Why do we need others to align our moral compass?

2009-11-06 23:57:00

Author:
comphermc

Posts: 5338

Oh yes, comph, delve a little deeper and you'll discover a whole host of juicy secrets and tidbits of information about how certain religions originated, and how they got corrupted and manipulated to suit the changing ways of society.

Quick example (hopefully non-offensive):
Why is it now acceptable to have female priests? It was never deemed acceptable before, so why now? Did God change His rules? (And why did I find it necessary to capitalise the 'H' there?)

I'm very interested in this topic, but I'm virtually restraining myself from ranting. Apologies.

2009-11-06 23:57:00

Author:
MrsSpookyBuz

Posts: 1492

I seriously think that religion is a major problem in the world. It's one thing to believe it, but it's another to force someone to believe it. It also starts flame wars. So for that reason, I'm going to avoid this thread (but I posted this, so I'm not doing a good job at that, am I?).

2009-11-06 23:57:00

Author:
CyberSora

Posts: 5551

I'm very interested in this topic, but I'm virtually restraining myself from ranting. Apologies.

Well, I have no problems with a little rant, as long as we don't aim to offend (which may be an inadvertent result).

2009-11-06 23:59:00

Author:
comphermc

Posts: 5338

Rock on Ir0n!

Don't worry, i will

2009-11-07 00:02:00

Author:
Unknown User

[B][SIZE="5"]
I think there's a certain negative stigma attached to anyone with atheistic beliefs, but that's just how life goes.

Depends where you are really, christianity has declined so much over here that the vast majority aren't bothered if your an atheist.

2009-11-07 00:03:00

Author:
Rabid-Coot

Posts: 6728

Did God change His rules? (And why did I find it necessary to capitalise the 'H' there?)

I never capitalize god. Most people just think I'm being lazy I think but it's just something I make it a point not to do. I don't know why other than I don't believe in a him so there's no point. It's like almost validating that he may exist if I do..... I know - it's weird.

2009-11-07 00:03:00

Author:
Morgana25

Posts: 5983

Depends where you are really, christianity has declined so much over here that the vast majority aren't bothered if your an atheist.

Yeah, that is far-from-the-case here. It's sad, really. I s'pose it's all part of the history of the United States... to escape the evil that is Europe, and all that. :/

I don't know why the US has remained so conservative in its views. Is it because conservativism opposes change and the US is on top (sort of)?

I'm just typing as I go here...

Edit: And we have to put up with psychos like Glenn Beck and the Southboro Baptist Church (I can't post those videos here, but you can search on your own)

2009-11-07 00:09:00

Author:
comphermc

Posts: 5338

Well, I have no problems with a little rant, as long as we don't aim to offend (which may be an inadvertent result).

Sorry, I wasn't very clear - I meant 'ranting' in the context of talking about something that by its very nature is personal and emotive.

To me, it isn't a case of believing or not believing in a god. It's surely more accurate to say there is or there isn't a god. Anyone who says they're not sure is kind of missing the point.

I'm not aversed to people seeking comfort in faith, especially if their lives have been bombarded with relentless preachings.

In the Fun and Friendly group, we were discussing a friend of mine who died two weeks ago. At the funeral, we sang a few hymns, and prayers were said. I had no issue with this as it provided comfort for those who sought it. When the coffin left the church, a song blared out the speakers - it was 'Always Look on the Bright Side of Life' from Monty Python's Life of Brian movie. (My friend's name was Brian).

It was his favourite song from his favourite film. I cried at that point. Why? Because I suppose when someone close to us dies, we are grieving for ourselves for the fact that we'll never see them again. This song summed my friend up completely.

Maybe my upbringing did more to damage any relationship I could have had with God. Being forced to attend Confession at seven years old? Hmm, sorry, it just isn't right.

2009-11-07 00:13:00

Author:
MrsSpookyBuz

Posts: 1492

I am sort of a christian/Catholic.
I beleive in Christian beleifs and believe in one saint, Saint Mary.
I pray a bit every night before i sleep Like just a lot of different things i pray about for the world to be ok i am actually sitting up in my bed for 5 minutes just going over prayers.. i dont go to church often though.

2009-11-07 00:52:00

Author:
Snrm

Posts: 6419

Oh jesus.

I believe im a jedi and the only true god is Yoda.

BUT IT ISN'T REAL.

LIKE MOST OTHER RELIGIONS.

God - HOW CAN IT EXIST.

I mean ... seriously.. you believe there is an omnipresent being who see's everything whilst also judging you, helping you and you also believe that his son came to a land where countless prophets came to and did miracles?!

Feeding 5000 - No one would eat it and they passed it on...

Water to Wine - No.

Curing - No, they still died - It was made up.

Sure, i believe this prophet guy existed but it's like calling obama the son of god... poeple just took a shine to one person and was like "yeh Obama! oh i mean Jesus!" They were slaves and poor people who WANTED to believe anything that made their lives better.

IF, and i mean IF, If this we're proved, SCIENTIFICALLY and god spoke to us in a REAL way then maybe i'd accept it..

but until then, It's a story.

2009-11-07 00:59:00

Author:
CreateNPlay

Posts: 1266

I think it's quite clear from previous posts, and my avatar, that I too am an "atheist" - more specifically, a scientific rationalist, of which atheism is just a logical consequence.

Anyways, specific responses ...

Yeah, I WANT to believe God exists... but no hokey pokey miracle can change my mind. TBQH, the fact that, in our day and age, the vast majority of society believes in God is kinda scary personally... but I digress ;-;

I agree on the later point - but on the former (actually wanting there to be one or more gods), I have to say my opinion diverges.

Now I was quite young when I realized that religion and mythology were one and the same - and at the time, yes, of course, I found it "unfortunate" that there was no god to speak of.

That being said, I no longer equate the idea of an invisible "benevolent" dictator from which you can never escape - even in death, who is constantly observing you and your innermost thoughts, can convict you of thought-crime, who holds you mortally liable for the actions of your ancestors, and who asks for the most extreme of all submissions (worship - a step beyond the slave/master relationship in magnitude) in order to be spared the consequence of the system he has arranged as a "good thing".

I have to say that I do have a bit of an internal reaction when it is earnestly suggested that something as awe-inspiring in breadth and beauty as the universe was designed by one of the petty, self-absorbed tyrants described by the myths of quite often illiterate ancient peoples who didn't know a germ from an evil spirit.

I have to say that from an older (and hopefully somewhat wiser) position, I find the premise of abrahamic to be rather immoral - their only good bits the bits that they plagiarize from every other basic moral construct in existence.

Now don't get me wrong, that basic morality stuff - "do unto others" and so forth - that's good stuff, but you hardly need an all-powerful magic being to convince you of it. There are even other primates who exhibit alot of that same moral behavior, and they've done so without the same superstition (presumably).

2009-11-07 01:06:00

Author:
Jagrevi

Posts: 1154

Wow, ballsy move, making the religious debate thread. I'll be interested to see where this goes. I think everyone who posts is going to be making extra effort to restrain themselves in some way or another.

The Kirk Cameron video - I think this guy's hilarious. I've watched scenes from his movie Fireproof, and I've seen him appear in televised religious debates. the guy is cuccoo! He speaks of atheism like it's a spreading disease, citing the shocking statistics of how many people are atheist now, and how big of a problem this is. While I laugh because he's Kirk Cameron, this is a prevalent attitude, especially in the "heartland" - less so on the coasts.

My father was raised and is Catholic, my mother, the forestry pathologist, literally a tree scientist, has always been an atheist. So that's a pretty curious couple to have for parents. I didn't "receive" either viewpoint actively. I did attend Catholic church occasionally as a child, and even sunday school for a brief period (if there's anything that'll scare a kid away from religion, it's making him go to school on SUNDAY MORNING). I have a twin sister, and around the age of 12, she was a devout Christian, reading her New Testament every night by herself, and at the same time I was as much an atheist as you'll find in a 12-year old.

I have to admit though, I never had a religious phase. Religion always seemed scary to me, the stories were frightening and weird and almost impossible to believe, and I never once felt anything like a kinship, anything like a feeling of "rightness" associated with it on a personal level. It is an interesting topic to me, and I've done a bit of research into the real, tangible history of world religions, and have discovered that it's really not hard to uncover a lot of very interesting stories and truths about our religions and what they mean and how they've come to be what they are today.

Here's what depresses me though - Many devout people don't want to know this stuff. This boggles my mind - It's one of the biggest parts of your LIFE - you literally live your life by this thing - and you don't want to know as much as you can about it?

One example - There's a book called "Misquoting Jesus" by one of the world's prominent biblical scholars, and a Christian, Bart Ehrman. He devoted his life to biblical study, he has personally learned ancient Greek and has read, analyzed, cross-checked, and studied from the oldest existing hand-written manuscripts of the bible that are available in the world today. His personal story is very interesting - he grew from being someone who saw the bible as it was taught - the untainted word of god - into someone who saw clearly that the bible was the work of men, a book that has changed dramatically over the ages of history for a variety of personal, political, economic, and social reasons. It completely shook up his worldview and his entire life changed. All of the information he learned is freely available because it is solid, viewable, empirical history - And yet many people who live their lives by this book refuse to acknowledge these facts, or to even explore them to begin with.

Of course this has only little to do with the bigger question of "is there a god?", but I feel like we're not even at that point yet where we can ask that - simply because the majority of people who believe there IS a God refuse to look at real evidence that doesn't even contradict that viewpoint - but rather contradicts a number of miniscule details that are a part of a book they worship. This makes the bigger debate remarkably difficult to conduct.

I think that fundamentalism is one of the biggest problems in the world today, across all major religions. Of course, when you say "major religions" today, it simply refers to the three Abrahamic religions. All branches of the same tree.

To give a bit of insight into where I'm at - if you were to ask me for anything, if I could transcend death and live forever, what would I do, where would I go? Not Heaven (though I'd be curious as hell to peek in on Hell). But what I would want is simply the universe to explore. I would skip from star to star, from galaxy to galaxy, and explore our greater home. I've never felt awe for God, and I've never felt God in anything I've seen. I've felt unlimited awe for the stars, for our planet, for the amazing breadth of unanswered questions and unexplored worlds. If the passion of Jesus will make one person cry, the Hubble Deep Field photos do the trick for me. It just so happens that I don't associate these things with God.

I think people use the word "God" for "awe", something we all experience. The unanswered and the amazing.

2009-11-07 01:21:00

Author:
Teebonesy

Posts: 1937

Aethist with occasional leanings towards Agnostic.

Personally I have a heavy lean to agnosticism. Simply because I am an empiricist and as such I cannot embrace a purely atheist viewpoint. I see no evidence anywhere to support the idea that a higher power does not exist, so I cannot feel that atheism (in the sense of a belief that there is no higher power) is justified. If I relax my need for proof, then I find myself aligning with Deist beliefs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism).

I was brought up by christian (Church of England) parents, who do not "practice" per se, but do like to believe. Both of them are also scientists and approach life with very balanced viewpoints. In addition to them both being scientists, they are both teachers and instilled me with a love of learning from a very young age. For many years, my mother also tought Religious Education on top of teaching science for many years. I was also brought up with a classical education, where I learned a lot of mythology as well. Essentially, my whole life I have been exposed to various religions, but largely from a detached, academic viewpoint.

I never had religion thrust upon me, and I don't think I ever actually belived in any gods, but I've always been aware. It saddens me to see self proclaimed Christians who know less of the Bible than I do.

I think this is a better way of describing my beliefs. To be completely accurate, I'd have to say that I firmly believe Christianity is not the answer... There's just so much wrong with it...

I would have to say that no religion offers all the answers - that's just silly. Why do we need others to align our moral compass?

Oh yes, comph, delve a little deeper and you'll discover a whole host of juicy secrets and tidbits of information about how certain religions originated, and how they got corrupted and manipulated to suit the changing ways of society.

To me, this viewpoint is something I see quite often and in many ways it is justified. However, I think issues of corrution etc stem largely from organised religion, rather than religion itself. Organised religion is driven by individuals and therein lies the flaw. Not with religion itself, but with the people who control organised religion. They are the ones that become corrupt and use other peoples' beliefs to drive their own agendas. It doesn't have to happen with orgnaised religion, but sadly it happens far to often.

Then there is the idea of indocrinating children at an age where they are too young to make informed decisions - not that they are given the chance to make an informed decision as they aren't fully informed. In our modern world, where we have so much access to information, this is actually proving counterproductive in many cases for the people who attempt it. Young people do start to question things, and the resentment of being forced into belief offends them, so they fight back.

At the risk of soundling like the NRA... Religion does not cause problems. People do. It's manipulation of religious beliefs, leveraging differences between cultures to promote xenophobia, deliberate misinterpretation, selective reading of religious texts, failing to adapt religious teachings to the modern world - These are the things that cause the problems associated with religion, and they are all driven by human factors. It's not restricted to religion either - politics, economics, race, class... so many factors can be leveraged to manipulate people in the same way.

Religion itself, the concept of having a belief system and worshiping a deity, is not a bad thing.

2009-11-07 01:24:00

Author:
rtm223

Posts: 6497

Personally I have a heavy lean to agnosticism. Simply because I am an empiricist and as such I cannot embrace a purely atheist viewpoint. I see no evidence anywhere to support the idea that a higher power does not exist, so I cannot feel that atheism (in the sense of a belief that there is no higher power) is justified. If I relax my need for proof, then I find myself aligning with Deist beliefs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism).

If world theistic trends simply shifted do deistic trends, I could die happy.

I digress...

Anyways, you mention being an empiricist, which is certainly a respectable position.

However, I think the inference that without evidence both concepts should be given equal water is something to challenge. Now, if you're a strict empiricist - in the sense you would say the same for the existence of Russell's Teapot (or, it's modern day equivalent "the invisible flying spaghetti monster"), then I think that's the end of that. If you're not though, a bit of a query ...

If the question "why is there something instead of nothing?" is a question as to how a complex universe can exist, is not calling in an incredibly complex thing in to explain it (an intelligent being - with reality warping powers no less, but let's just stick with "intelligent being") not an ultimate answer, almost by definition?

When we ask if there's a God or not - I think it bears in mind that we're not asking if there's a higher power - electromagnetism is a "higher power" - the question is whether or not there is a God. We're asking whether or not the cosmic "first cause" (assuming there is one as well), is an intelligent being capable of complex thought.

If a God did exist, certainly he would need to be complex himself - and even more importantly, certainly he would need to exist in some context. How could an intelligent being have a thought if there was no context, no basic rules of reality, to convey thoughts in whatever passes for his brain?

Would you concede that the proposition that the thing responsible for raising complexity out of the lack of it is a complex intelligent being just like us (intelligent beings being only one type of innumerable phenomena), at least below the 50% mark? Does Occam's razor bear no mentioning?

We start off by asking for explanation for the universe, insisting that a complex thing such as it could not just come from nowhere - and as an answer we are being asked to accept a complex thing that just, for all intensive purposes, came from nowhere.

Certainly if there was "an intelligent being who created our world", he could not be God in this sense. Through some means, any complex intelligent being would have to come-out-of/exist-in some context.

2009-11-07 01:55:00

Author:
Jagrevi

Posts: 1154

If world theistic trends simply shifted do deistic trends, I could die happy.

I digress...

Anyways, you mention being an empiricist, which is certainly a respectable position.

However, I think the inference that without evidence both concepts should be given equal water is something to challenge. Now, if you're a strict empiricist - in the sense you would say the same for the existence of Russell's Teapot (or, it's modern day equivalent "the invisible flying spaghetti monster"), then I think that's the end of that. If you're not though, a bit of a query ...

If the question "why is there something instead of nothing?" is a question as to how a complex universe can exist, is not calling in an incredibly complex thing in to explain it (an intelligent being - with reality warping powers no less, but let's just stick with "intelligent being") not an ultimate answer, almost by definition?

When we ask if there's a God or not - I think it bears in mind that we're not asking if there's a higher power - electromagnetism is a "higher power" - the question is whether or not there is a God. We're asking whether or not the cosmic "first cause" (assuming there is one as well), is an intelligent being capable of complex thought.

If a God did exist, certainly he would need to be complex himself - and even more importantly, certainly he would need to exist in some context. How could an intelligent being have a thought if there was no context, no basic rules of reality, to convey thoughts in whatever passes for his brain?

Would you concede that the proposition that the thing responsible for raising complexity out of the lack of it is a complex intelligent being just like us (intelligent beings being only one type of innumerable phenomena), at least below the 50% mark? Does Occam's razor bear no mentioning?

We start off by asking for explanation for the universe, insisting that a complex thing such as it could not just come from nowhere - and as an answer we are being asked to accept a complex thing that just, for all intensive purposes, came from nowhere.

And therein lies the paradox- nothing somehow existing.

Right now, the two big theories for the origin of mankind are nothing exploding into everything, creating a bunch of cells that somehow evolved into us- and some omnipowerful god always existing and just creating us one day.

Either way, the idea that everything just began, in my opinion, is a concept that no explanation can sound like anyone older then a two year old rought it up.

Existence confounds me- I literally wonder every day HOW anything can exist, how everything can begin, or if everything never began and always was... wait, this is a religion thread!

ANYWAY... I was listening on the bus the other day. Some kids were talking about harassing a Muslim girl or something, saying the thing about the 80 virgins and all that. The girl responded (according to them, I heard second hand) that that was just the extremists who took it the wrong way. The kid responded that you sure YOU don't take it the wrong way?

Well, yeah, that actually got me thinking... who is it that's got it misinterpreted? I unno, I shall leave this thread.

2009-11-07 02:06:00

Author:
RockSauron

Posts: 10882

Existence confounds me- I literally wonder every day HOW anything can exist, how everything can begin

A thought ...

If energies in the universe can have negative values - gravity for instance, what if I were to suggest (I can link to an interesting physics lecture if you really want a follow-up) that the approximated sum value of energy in the universe was 0.

Meaning that in order to create the universe we have now from nothing, nothing actually need be created, the big +1s only need to be separated from the -1s from the big pile of +1s and -1s that IS nothing.

Is that really an unfathomable paradox? School children turn 0 into (2 + (-2)) in classrooms everyday.

creating a bunch of cells that somehow evolved into us

I do hope you realize that this is not only a fact in science, but that it's far more specific than "somehow".

and some omnipowerful god always existing and just creating us one day.

For the record, only one of these two "theories" is a "theory" in the 'scientifically accepted' sense.

2009-11-07 02:11:00

Author:
Jagrevi

Posts: 1154

Ugh, my eyes and head hurt so I have only read the short posts (like 4 sentences posts). I will be back to read the rest. But I really wanted to speak up for a second.
I grew up in a very Christian home. Not to capitalize for any other reason than its thing I have grown up doing. My mother and father were both ministers and I grew up in churches. Every revival in driving distance, we went to. My dad always went to Camp Meetings. Always always always in church. My hometown is Christian central. To say it isn't easy to be anything else is, well, you know. We had Buddist move into our neighborhood and soon as it was known, they were gone. Like us kids liked them and were very curious where they went all of a sudden.
I found myself without beliefs when I was able to get out of it all. Seeing as I'm a very logical person, the Bible, when not shoved down my throat, seemed more like fictional books. Not to mention that my mom disagreed with me reading anything not religious based. It didn't take long to find myself an Aethiest, don't call me an aetheist though because I don't like to be categorized, and stuck in a situation where I couldn't escape/
I found alot of people in the last few years that share my non beliefs so its easier to say that i don't believe. But I still feel like a coward for fearing to let anyone know.
I also feel Christians aren't very smart, usually easy to manipulate if you have ever tried. Absolutely no offense to any believers in here. I have just noticed in social "experiments" that its not hard to convince people with beliefs to believe what you want them to believe.

2009-11-07 02:15:00

Author:
thefrozenpenquin

Posts: 479

I just think religions are a society problem. I mean, it's the resulting systems issued from people wanting power a very long time ago. This is also mixed up with GOOD and INFLUENT people that attached extremely important values to it. (making it even more powerful of a system as a result).

So basically, my thoughts actually transcends religions. I perfectly understand what religious people are into and why they are there. I was also raised a Christian Catholic. Religions are still working before they put easy answers in the head of all people with questions and people that don't want research life or a deeper meaning. It's basically a guide and that can be benefital to some people. This is why I will always respect someone chosing to follow a religion. However, to me it's just the nice cover of the book or the r?sum? on the back cover. Real meat is inside the book, where most people don't dare looking because IT IS hard and long to read. Thing is, there has been ALOT of extremely important people through history and the bible actually talks alot about real life and the reality of this universe we live in. But the true meaning of like has been kinda lost through the evolution of script and as time goes on. Today people take the bible at face value and litterally so it doesn't mean what it was supposed to mean anymore.

Things is, Jesus was probably "real" in the means someone probably extremely intelligent and educated probably dedicated his life into "teaching" people some sense, trying to spread his comprehension of the universe that was EXTREMELY advanced for his time. This resulted in what the religions we have today but I understand what the guy was trying to tell us.

Now to enter my exact vision of this universe would be another EXTREMELY long post...

.

2009-11-07 02:21:00

Author:
RangerZero

Posts: 3901

I've just got one thing to say about religion:

I don't believe in God, but the one thing I hate worse than bible-beating bigots are smug Atheists who think that they're right and everyone else is "stupid" for believing a religion.

I think Atheism is very much a "religion". It's a "belief" that the world wasn't made by a god. I don't think it was ever stated that a religion is a belief in one or more gods. It's hard for anyone to not follow a religion, whether it's popular or something you made up. Someone who isn't religious, to me, would be someone who doesn't question anything and just accepts it, which could be just as bad as never trying to figure out what is really going on.

2009-11-07 02:23:00

Author:
qrtda235566

Posts: 3664

@Jagrevi you are going to get my head hurting. I absolutely love delving into string theories and quatuum physics. I love trying to figure out the universe. They say that the Universe started with the (2 + (-2)) deal. And somehow the +2 overcame the -2 and the universe began.

2009-11-07 02:23:00

Author:
thefrozenpenquin

Posts: 479

@Awesomemans: If thats to me, I'm not saying anyone is stupid, just gullible. And totally agree that Aetheism is a belief. Thats why I prefer not to be called one. I think if you have it figured out then your wrong.
And in my own experiences all the religious people I have encountered could be talked into believing whatever I can make sound convincing.

2009-11-07 02:28:00

Author:
thefrozenpenquin

Posts: 479

Someone who isn't religious, to me, would be someone who doesn't question anything and just accepts it, which could be just as bad as never trying to figure out what is really going on.

This doesn't make sense to me. Someone that doesn't ask himself question is already having enough answers. That person is probably the type to let his life being "answered" by organised thoughts --- such as religions.
The person that doesn't "follow" will question. It makes sense because they actually search and they do not want pre-made answer. They don't follow, they move forward by themselves.

.

2009-11-07 02:28:00

Author:
RangerZero

Posts: 3901

Certainly if there was "an intelligent being who created our world", he could not be God in this sense. Through some means, any complex intelligent being would have to come-out-of/exist-in some context.

Under any kind of scrutiny, there's just a wide circle we run in with regards to the question of God -
"where'd the universe come from?"
"God."
"where'd HE come from?"
"nowhere, he was always around."
"What? How does that make any sense?"
"....I'm HUNGRY!!"

When we start to break down deism vs atheism vs agnosticism, I can't properly call myself an atheist if an atheist is someone who steadfastly believes that there is no god of any sort. Instead I define myself as an an atheist who "does not believe in god", which is more passive. It's not what I do, it's what I don't do. If we want to define what I DO, then I'll go with Bill Maher and Thomas Jefferson and call myself a "rationalist".

There's a great deal of science fiction that deals with the idea of a tangible god which is the result of the evolution of intelligent life. Intelligence becomes a god, the god, if it wishes, may create a new universe with new life.

What if we learned that we were created under such circumstances? All of us atheists would suddenly be faced with the specter of a god that actually created our universe from nothing. But a god that itself came from another universe.

This scenario goes absolutely nowhere in getting to the bottom of the question, because of that circle we run in. "Right, but where did HIS universe come from" etc.

BUT, as it related to the topic of agnosticism, I have to concede that there must be some distant possibility of a tangible intelligent creator, outside of the imaginings of organized religion. Scientists have little trouble imagining a scenario in which some kind of god is possible. But still I call myself an atheist and a rationalist, because this kind of scenario and the deist viewpoint, while interesting to imagine, falls nowhere near the category of "reason" - this is why it's found in science fiction. That's one thing that worries me about deism, is that it seems to claim god for rationalism and reason. To me, these things must be kept far away from each other until such time as god appears and says "hey, what's up guys. you two there, you're correct, the rest of you, you were all wrong. good try though, good try."

2009-11-07 02:30:00

Author:
Teebonesy

Posts: 1937

This doesn't make sense to me. Someone that doesn't ask himself question is already having enough answers. That person is probably the type to let his life being "answered" by organised thoughs --- such as religions.
The person that doesn't "follow" will question. It makes sense because they actually search and they do not want pre-made answer. They don't follow, they move forward by themselves.

.

Yeah, and then that person is religious. I think it's impossible not to be religious.

@thefrozenpenguin:

That post wasn't about you, but this is:

What have you convinced to religious people? Examples are awful helpful. Thanks!

2009-11-07 02:37:00

Author:
qrtda235566

Posts: 3664

I'll go with Bill Maher and Thomas Jefferson and Henry David Thoreau and call myself a "rationalist".

A much better term by the way. It avoids commitment to a specific conclusion, simply stating loyalty to reason and rationality.

There's a great deal of science fiction that deals with the idea of a tangible god which is the result of the evolution of intelligent life. Intelligence becomes a god, the god, if it wishes, may create a new universe with new life.

I'd say this is juggling terms a bit. I wouldn't call that "God" in the sense we mean, because he didn't create "everything".

I would simply equate that to being created by an alien.

What if we learned that we were created under such circumstances? All of us atheists would suddenly be faced with the specter of a god that actually created our universe from nothing. But a god that itself came from another universe.

To me, this feels like exploiting the change from the old meaning of "universe" (everything) to the new meaning of "universe" (our dimensional set). If a being evolved, then by definition it's not the "ultimate, first cause" deity that I am explicitly labeling as seemingly impossible.

I think what we need here is an explicit rule set as what qualifies you as "God" - because what you've suggest here to me does strike me as impressive, and the parallel obvious, but not "God".

2009-11-07 02:41:00

Author:
Jagrevi

Posts: 1154

I'm going to go against the flow here and talk about the video itself.

I've seen that video before, and seen it be completely ripped to shreds by the more prominent atheist youtubers, and rightly so.

The problem here isn't about religion itself, but about a few select people on a crusade to discredit evolution, the scientific method and critical thinking. To achieve this goal, they sow blatant disinformation because they are unwilling to try to disprove evolution scientifically. They are particularly insidious because they teach their followers not to believe in scientists and atheists, not to question their own beliefs and some even go so far as to encourage breaking the law. I suppose one could label them "fundamentalists" or some such.

I would not lump all of religion with those people. They are an extreme case, which unfortunately continue to exist. I will state the following facts with regards to the video though :

-It was already ruled unconstitutional to teach "Creationism"/"Intelligent Design" in public schools in the U.S. through the Dover trial.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_School_District

-What Kirk Cameron is suggesting is to piggyback the teaching of Creationism by distributing it within an unrelated book. They essentially are hiding it because they clearly know they are acting unconstitutionally. There is no other rational explanation to why they are not simply distributing it as a stand-alone Creationism book.

-Darwin's theory doesn't explain the origin of life (abiogenesis), it explains the diversity of life. This point seems particularly hard for these people to understand.

-Even if they discredit Darwin's book, it would not consequently discredit all of the experimentation, DNA evidence and fossil evidence done for the last 150 years which proved and refined the theory of evolution to this day.

-The theory of evolution in no way disproves the existence of deities. As noted before, the theory of evolution has nothing to do with the origin of life.

What these people are doing is despicable regardless of their beliefs.

As for the topic of religion itself, that's a hard one to answer. I was raised loosely Christian, but eventually outgrew my belief in the bible and in organized religion (to this day I am still unsure exactly when or why it happened). I would not consider myself an atheist though, because I have grown a particular belief that there exists a non-sentient force which allows the universe to exist. I do not believe in an afterlife, but I do believe that all humans should try to treat eachother with respect in order to avoid needlessly causing strife.

2009-11-07 02:51:00

Author:
Gilgamesh

Posts: 2536

A much better term by the way. It avoids commitment to a specific conclusion, simply stating loyalty to reason and rationality.

I like that you guys bring this up. My reason and rationality at this moment tells me there is no god. Now if some superbeing showed up on my door step and claimed to be god I still don't think I'd buy it. Omnipotent, supernatural powers, snappy dresser - whatever his proof of divinity - I don't know what it would take to "proove" to me he/she/it was or wasn't god.

So how do you define god? It's terribly hard to just say he's (she/it) is the supreme being and therefore god. Supreme compared to what? How would we know if he wasn't just an "evolved" life form or using technology we couldn't begin to comprehend so he appeared god like.

I just don't think there's anyway to know for sure and anyone who claims they can may be reacting to their faith or belief system without seriously thinking about the "what if he showed up on your door step" scenario.

btw, loving the debate/conversation here.

2009-11-07 02:53:00

Author:
Morgana25

Posts: 5983

Yeah, and then that person is religious. I think it's impossible not to be religious.

@thefrozenpenguin:

That post wasn't about you, but this is:

What have you convinced to religious people? Examples are awful helpful. Thanks!

Oh, nothing too big. To be honest I can't remember specific times because I have a pretty short memory. It's never trying to change their belief in whatever deity, I didn't like when people approached me like that when I was Christian. I have gotten my mom to stop watching a certain show in particular based on the sole argument that if God's love is a gift, then why do you have to make 3 easy payments of $29.99. Obviously she eventually conceded to the fact, she was a street minister you know. I will have to get back here tomorrow, like I posted before, my eyes and brain are tired. I have to come back to read the longer posts anyway.

edit for remembering: I have gotten a few people to question parts of the Bible with the Hercules was before Sampson. And the Adam and Eve argument. You know, we are all products of incest or they didn't exist. BTW, I have heard so many preachers say that "Then we must be from incest."

2009-11-07 02:56:00

Author:
thefrozenpenquin

Posts: 479

Well, I myself was brought up Roman Catholic. We stopped going to church when I was about 9 years old. It's the best thing that ever happened to me. Over the years I have debated Gods existence and have come to the conclusion that there is something called God, but it's nothing the church talks about. When you get right down to it, God is an idea rather than a person or thing. I believe that the universe is in complete harmony with the multiverse and whatever created that. Too me... that is what this label of God is attemepting to pin down. The fact that wars are waged and innocent people are murdered, beaten, raped, de-limbed, sodomized, along with all the other attrocities commited in his name (whatever name you choose to give him) is just proof that he doesn't exist and that all religions are a fraud and only serve the purposes of people who are evil or weak. That's right... evil... or weak. Your one or the other if you buy into any religion. Heck, my mother is highly religious and active in the church, and while I love her very much I can still recognize that she depends on the church to get her through the day instead of admitting that life is difficult and we will never know it's purpose until we leave this earth (and even that's not likely). This, in my opinion, makes her weak. It doesn't make her a bad person... just a weak one.

I'm not an Atheist, nor am I agnostic... both those terms would imply that I belong to a specific group or sect where religion is concerned. I am quite simply, my own person... and one who is spiritual. I can't tolerate when I tell people where I stand on religion and they try to label me one of those terms... it's disrespectful and rude. Why should my lack of faith be given a name anyways? It would seem to me that it only serves the church's purpose of demonizing and identifying those like me who are not part of their group. I'm sure if they had their way, many religious people would prefer that I had something tattoed on my forhead so they could better identify me in public situations. My distaste for ANY and ALL organized religions is that they are just that... organizations. I too understand the FACT that all religions are simply a way to calm and control the masses.

If the church taught the true origins behind religions, and taught the fact that theirs was not the first, that almost all religions share the same basic stories/number of apostles or brothers/life lessons/etc., then people would get wise and stop supporting them and their corrupt organizations altogether. Of course this would only happen if the masses really weren't stupid... which they are.

This may sound harsh to anyone who is religious, but I really don't care what others think because I know in my heart that your gods would punish me for thinking this way... while my own fairy tale God would forgive me and understand, while taking my hand and personally walking me past St. Peter and through the pearly gates into his golden kingdom.

2009-11-07 03:15:00

Author:
Rustbukkit

Posts: 1737

To me, this feels like exploiting the change from the old meaning of "universe" (everything) to the new meaning of "universe" (our dimensional set). If a being evolved, then by definition it's not the "ultimate, first cause" deity that I am explicitly labeling as seemingly impossible.

I think what we need here is an explicit rule set as what qualifies you as "God" - because what you've suggest here to me does strike me as impressive, and the parallel obvious, but not "God".

This is exactly along the lines I've been thinking, in fact - but you're describing God as something who created "everything", and instead I'm painting a portrait of the universe, as you said, as one set of a more modern viewpoint of the "multiverse". So if the situation is that each universe is created by its own god, each the result of evolution in another universe, YOUR definition of "God" wouldn't be a God that created everything, simply the God that was the CATALYST for creation - who created the 'first' instance of something. Assuming there ever was a "first', because honestly, if a God can exist forever, a universe can exist forever, or a timeline of universes can stretch out forward and backward in time forever.

So God comes up in two questions - the god that created US, and the god that was the catalyst for the very "first" act of creation, which could conceivably have had nothing at all directly to do with us, or the universe in which we live. Between these, the god that's of far more interest to me is the one that created us - the "catalyst" god, who could likely be long dead, is of particularly small interest to me because it is so unlikely. Not that the other kind ISN'T, but between them I'll take the alien creator because it is at least quantifiable.

And if people continue to insist on the terms "a-theist" and "a-gnostic", I'm going to continue to insist on passive, non-definitions for them - I won't define atheist as someone who actively believes in NO god, I'm going to define it as someone who simply DOESN'T believe in one. And let's just eschew it altogether when we can, because many people can't agree on the definition anyway. It's only a convenient label. Rationalist is an active term that actually has a meaning. I don't think that actively believing in God IS rational, so I feel it's a fitting term.

Not that devout religious people are INCAPABLE of being rational - that's not at all what I'm suggesting. Merely that "rationalIST" suggests the core of someone's worldview is empirical reason, which cannot by definition apply to anyone religious. So I'll take "rationalist".

Honestly, I don't spend much time with the question of "god", because of the inevitable circles I'll tread and retread. Until something comes up to prove otherwise, I'm putting god on the back of the shelf and meanwhile I'm going to follow the James Webb telescope "religiously".

2009-11-07 03:25:00

Author:
Teebonesy

Posts: 1937

I'm too lazy to read over the last 3 pages of argumentation, as interetsing and mature they may be, so I'll just go ahead and state my personal beliefs.

I was raised a Catholic.... I started to have doubts when I did my First Communion and I didn't feel anything, and around that time I was getting into science and everything.. I became a Scientific Alcoholic then deviated out of it... I now renounce the entire religion... I'm a person very deeply rooted in logic so It's what's mean to be... BUt otherwise, I believe that maybe some sort of God, or karma or destiny or fate, etc. kind of balances the moral actions of the world... maybe. In the end, it's just a personal hope that there is something that institutes a natural right and wrong process (And maybe, like Rock, a heaven to go to after death), but the only thing I'm sure of is that I'm not sure. And like T-Bone said, I'm not going to waste my life questioning it, and I'll stick with science for now.

That being said, I respect people who do believe in God (Or Gods, depending on religion. Each to his own Huh?) and I actually respect them, because it's awesome for someone to have faith; it's healthy as well. However, I hate, absolutely LOATHE the morons who shove down pother's throat, the Theocrats, the Holy Killers, the Racist and Bigots; the ones that go against their religion in some sort of paradoxical, oxymoronical way in order to further drown the public with their overshot ideals.

2009-11-07 03:50:00

Author:
Astrosimi

Posts: 2046

Wow, you've all been busy. I'm glad I created this thread. I actually had Jagrevi and Teebonesy in mind when I made it, but it's nice to see what some of you others think. I was originally just going to post that video, but I thought it might be of more interest to make it a general religious discussion.

There are too many things to respond to, and the girlfriend is getting upset that I'm still on here, so I'll just say a few things...

I was fascinated by some of Socrates' work. If you'd consider yourself in the same boat as Morgana and myself (i.e. somewhere between Atheistic and Agnostic), and don't mind a little bit of dry reading, Socrates discusses some particularly interesting topics. The biggest point he makes is that even if there was some ultimate, higher power deity, we as humans are completely incapable of understanding what that higher power might be. He likened it to mathematics (a plus for me), in that Mathematics is an infinity - it completely describes, creates, defines our reality, yet we can never hope to understand even a fraction of it.

Granted, Socrates suggests some wild stuff in there, which reflects the beliefs of his time (Zeus, and all that). He believed that the traditional Gods (Zeus, Hera, and the titans before them) were the creation of an ultimate God. This god was perfect, so his creations (the Greek gods) were perfect, but a lesser perfect (I know, right?). When these lesser Gods created us, they made mistakes... we are not gods, but human... He was eventually executed for his teachings (go figure).

I don't recall all of it, but it's rather interesting. If you'd like to give your brain a little stretching, I'd suggest some Socratic Dialogue. It's by no means light reading, though. I think the reading I'm referring to is called The Phaedo.

----

So, yeah. I'd have to mirror that belief, which is probably pretty common held among agnostics, that even if there was an ultimate deity, we can't even begin to fathom what he/she/it might be. In that sense, the idea of an organized religion is rather silly indeed (again, no offense to anyone - these are my beliefs).

----

Ah, one last thing. I've had this question many times, and it was mentioned briefly on the last page... how do you handle the issue of religion with your kids? I'm not certain, but I think only one of the people who has posted so far has kids of his own. Do we try to offer all the different viewpoints? Do we expose them to as many world religions as we can think of? Or do we teach them what we believe to be the truth. As Astrosimi said, "to each his own," but at what point do you try to push your own beliefs on others (namely, your children)?

Discuss.

Thanks for everyone's posts. I like to expand my brain with discussion...

Edit: Ok, one more. I actually do understand the point of religion. It offers stories and lessons to be learned... what some fail to do is to take these stories as lessons, instead of steadfast truth. At the end of the day, religion can only offer so many insights. You have to experience your own life, and create your own stories to ever truly grow as an individual. At least, that's how I'd think it should go...

OK, so it wasn't as brief as I planned. Sorry (to you, and to my girlfriend)... :blush:

2009-11-07 03:57:00

Author:
comphermc

Posts: 5338

GAHHH...MY BRAAAAAAIIIIIINNNNN...IT HUUUURRRRTTTSSSS!

i have to say i'm agnostic...i'm only twelve,yes,but it doesn't make sense...it makes me think this=there is a god that created the universe...but thats all we could possibly say...its pretty much the classic"whats the meaning of life?"question...
we have no awnser!
so yeah...I hope my parents don't see this

(well maybe my mom might be ok with it...she had 6-never mind...too personal!and my mom would never forgive me!...)

EDIT - i now astromi!those types of people are the kinds i'd see in hell(if its real!)

EDIT - EDIT - and if god is real...who is to say evolution isn't the way in which he creates?

2009-11-07 04:09:00

Author:
theswweet

Posts: 2468

As far as children, I've explained to my daughter what we know about the universe, a brief description of how we know, and the general explanation that gets to us. (She seems to like the idea that the material in her body is billions of years old and has been in the hearts of stars and been exploded outwards with incredible forces. she gets very animated talking about where other elements come from - she makes "explody" noises and hand gestures).

Anyways, when it comes to religion, I just talk to her about how the ideas themselves developed, with no particular emphasis on any one religion. I've had conversations with her about Hinduism, Judaism, the Ancient Greeks, and so forth. It isn't until most recently that she even came to really realize that any were severely more popular at her school than any others.

I basically present them to her in an anthropological context. To this day she has yet to even ask me "what I believe", as when I describe the *actual* world to her, I pretty much just describe what we know, and how we know it.

Basically, I've just tried to raise her in a world where *belief* isn't what defines us.

...its pretty much the classic"whats the meaning of life?"question...
we have no awnser!

I'd put forth that that's because there isn't an answer, the question itself is just a human construction that has more to do with the way we think than anything about the universe in which we live.

And, on a personal note, I rather think it's good life doesn't have a meaning. If life had "a" meaning, that seems rather restrictive and degrading to every other value that can be found in life.

and if god is real...who is to say evolution isn't the way in which he creates?

Well, at least I'd argue, in the sense that it happens in it's own right. For example, if he was real, and we killed him, it would still happen, just like 1 plus 1 would still be 2.

Whose to say that nuclear fusion isn't the way I create starlight?

2009-11-07 04:25:00

Author:
Jagrevi

Posts: 1154

2009-11-07 04:30:00

Author:
theswweet

Posts: 2468

Ah, one last thing. I've had this question many times, and it was mentioned briefly on the last page... how do you handle the issue of religion with your kids?

Man, I honestly don't know how to do it. I don't have kids and don't plan on it, and I don't know WHAT I'd do. The problem with being a child is that you're too young to "grok the fullness" (points to the water brothers who got that one). So while it's a lovely ideal to offer them the freedom to chose whatever they want... Most children, in their lack of extensive knowledge, turn to their parents for answers. They generally WANT to know what their parents know and believe.

I feel like it's difficult to do real damage to your kids if you're a sincere, caring parent. You can offer them the world and let them choose; you can make them go to church because you want to save their souls; you can choose to only tell them empirical truths; you can do any number of things, but we're living in the information age. As long as you're not a tyrant as a parent, and even if you ARE, there's a chance your child will learn and come to form their own decisions and beliefs. Look at the people in this thread who were raised one thing and became something else. The thread even began with Kirk Cameron, who claims he is a former atheist who found Christ.

How would I handle it? I think it would be important to mention that a lot of people in the world believe in different religions, and to explain why, and offer up the chance, if desired, to learn any and all of them, while giving a grounded education in what we know for a fact.

I know I'd strive to be a Carl Sagan for my kids. Offer up a sense of wonder at the universe, at the things we know, the things we're beginning to learn, and the things we don't understand.

2009-11-07 04:31:00

Author:
Teebonesy

Posts: 1937

Offer up a sense of wonder at the universe, at the things we know, the things we're beginning to learn, and the things we don't understand.[/QUOTE]

and will we really EVER understand? no! so we should not worry about religion!...we have other problems like finding an alternative energy source to save the planet!we need to stop wars from ever happeneing ever again!it doesn't matter what we believe is out there...if there is...he sure isn't **** proud at the moment!!!we need to find out the questionS"is there life on other planets?"(by the way...they found ancient bacteria fossils on mars...sooooo yeah...there at least WAS)awnser!we need to work together not as seperated countries...but as a unified world!
if religion is destroying us...does it really matter?

...so what do you think about that rant?

2009-11-07 04:42:00

Author:
theswweet

Posts: 2468

EDIT - yes...if he created the universe...he couldn't really undo it...if he IS real...

Wait a second ...

Now I'm pretty far into the "atheist" camp - although again, I'd prefer rationalist, atheism just kind of results from it - but still, this struck me ... are you claiming that "God" (presumably Yahweh of ancient Hebrew mythology, or the later variations Jehova or Allah) wouldn't be able to destroy the universe if he wanted?

...so what do you think about that rant?

Letters. Sizes. Toned down.

if religion is destroying us...does it really matter?

Again, I don't believe in any Gods, so of course from my point of view, religious violence and religious impediments in science, politics, etc all seem rather unnecessary to me.

However, for people who actually do believe, does it not follow that they think it would matter? Which is more sinister, the guy who believes I'm ****ed to hell and yells at me from the street corner, or the the guy who believes I'm ****ed to hell who doesn't lift a finger to save me?

I'd say it kind of follows from their belief if they take the whole thing completely seriously.

2009-11-07 04:45:00

Author:
Jagrevi

Posts: 1154

Wait a second ...

Now I'm pretty far into the "atheist" camp - although again, I'd prefer rationalist, atheism just kind of results from it - but still, this struck me ... are you claiming that "God" (presumably Yahweh of ancient Hebrew mythology, or the later variations Jehova or Allah) wouldn't be able to destroy the universe if he wanted?

no...i think that if there IS a god...to him this is just a show!...and hes waiting for it to destroy itself!(like i said...i DON'T know...)

2009-11-07 04:49:00

Author:
theswweet

Posts: 2468

I'd just like to say that I am a Latter Day Saint, and I'm proud of it.

2009-11-07 04:53:00

Author:
Frinklebumper

Posts: 941

Thanks, Frinkle! Way to step up!

2009-11-07 04:56:00

Author:
comphermc

Posts: 5338

(by the way...they found ancient bacteria fossils on mars...sooooo yeah...there at least WAS

Well, to be fair, this was never confirmed. I remember hearing about this, but most of the news sources I read were heavily skeptical. From space.com:

Russian scientists claim to have discovered fossils of primitive extraterrestrial organisms in a meteorite thought to be a leftover from the formation of the solar system.

Similar theories have met with skepticism in the past and there are doubts about the latest claims. It seems that garden-variety microbes love to feast on these carbon-rich meteorites...

"Since these objects look so much like the remains of terrestrial organisms, it seems most likely that they are remains of terrestrial organisms," said Allan Treiman from the Lunar and Planetary Institute in Houston. "Terrestrial bacteria and fungi infest meteorites almost immediately on landing on Earth, take up residence and consume whatever they can. The fungi worm their way into the meteorites along cracks and pores, and 'burrow' into the carbonaceous material as they eat it".

So I wouldn't take that as any sort of confirmation of extraterrestrial life - at least, not yet. So far, we have no solid evidence of any sort of life anywhere outside of our own planet. If/when it becomes CONFIRMED, the news will be spectacularly huge.

I think the real question is that of INTELLIGENT life - what kind of evolution is this? Practically-speaking, it has ensured that we are the dominent species on the planet, but we are also the only species with the power to completely eradicate all life on our world. That doesn't seem to be good times on any sort of evolutionary scale.

There is evidence for a frightening bottleneck in early human population. It's an incredible scenario. that early in our evolution as humans, we were on the edge of extinction. But something happened. The story of our species is a fascinating epic - we can trace our genetic history today, we know how the world was different, and we can determine the paths our common ancestors took to all corners of the world. Has anyone here done a cheek-swab and learned of their ancient lineage? I've been planning on doing one of these - National Geographic has a 100 dollar kit, but there are also far more in-depth ones that cost a hearty chunk of change. So... I'll probably go with Geographic's.

There's an amazing and enlightening documentary I saw on human genetic history, I'll have to hunt it down.

2009-11-07 04:56:00

Author:
Teebonesy

Posts: 1937

Just dropping by to say nice work to all of you in holding an intelligent debate and discussion. It's too bad that threads like this in the past were corrupted by closed and arrogant minds and - as a result - they were locked.

Again, keep things smart, be fair to one another, and we won't have a problem here.

2009-11-07 05:01:00

Author:
supersickie

Posts: 1366

thx supersickie!

2009-11-07 05:08:00

Author:
theswweet

Posts: 2468

I'm an atheist but with a twist... I'm married to a minister!

2009-11-07 05:10:00

Author:
mrsupercomputer

Posts: 1335

I'm an atheist but with a twist... I'm married to a minister!

Whoa! The plot, thickens...

Seriously, though. That is wild! Do you ever have these type of discussions, or is it a 'swept-under-the-rug' issue, if you don't mind my asking?

2009-11-07 05:11:00

Author:
comphermc

Posts: 5338

Whoa! The plot, thickens...

Seriously, though. That is wild! Do you ever have these type of discussions, or is it a 'swept-under-the-rug' issue, if you don't mind my asking?

i'm with compher...that is freaky...

2009-11-07 05:13:00

Author:
theswweet

Posts: 2468

Well, to be fair, this was never confirmed. I remember hearing about this, but most of the news sources I read were heavily skeptical. From space.com:

So I wouldn't take that as any sort of confirmation of extraterrestrial life - at least, not yet. So far, we have no solid evidence of any sort of life anywhere outside of our own planet. If/when it becomes CONFIRMED, the news will be spectacularly huge.

i said they found FOSSILS!(but yeah thats still good speculation!)

2009-11-07 05:17:00

Author:
theswweet

Posts: 2468

Seriously, though. That is wild! Do you ever have these type of discussions, or is it a 'swept-under-the-rug' issue, if you don't mind my asking?

Well, my wife is actually very liberal in her views of the Bible and God. She doesn't believe in the creation story, virgin birth, or that I'm going to burn in hell for eternity... she doesn't believe in hell. So, it's rather easy for the two of us to get along. With the Kirk Cameron video, my wife would agree with me that it's complete nonsense.

EDIT: This doesn't mean that we don't have interesting discussions about theology however. I mean, we still disagree on a pretty big issue... God.

2009-11-07 05:25:00

Author:
mrsupercomputer

Posts: 1335

Your wife sounds like a cool little lady!

Edit: haha. That would be an issue, huh?

-----

How's this for an interesting situation...

My girlfriend was raised in a household where her mother was Southern Baptist (very strict, indeed!) and her father was raised Catholic, yet she had never gone to church. She never even considered the idea of religion until her freshman year of high school! Needless to say, she was much less impressionable than a young child. She still hasn't even made up her mind on the issue (nor even made an effort to do so). It's pretty much a non-issue for her, which blows my mind. Doesn't she ever consider these things? Guess not...

2009-11-07 05:27:00

Author:
comphermc

Posts: 5338

Well, my wife is actually very liberal in her views of the Bible and God. She doesn't believe in the creation story, virgin birth, or that I'm going to burn in hell for eternity... she doesn't believe in hell. So, it's rather easy for the two of us to get along. With the Kirk Cameron video, my wife would agree with me that it's complete nonsense.

EDIT: This doesn't mean that we don't have interesting discussions about theology however. I mean, we still disagree on a pretty big issue... God.

yah...thats a given :/

2009-11-07 05:30:00

Author:
theswweet

Posts: 2468

nice logical discussions!
Just saying here, but I AM A CHRISTIAN.
A lutheren to be exact.

So yep! Just throwing that out there!

2009-11-07 05:34:00

Author:
chezhead

Posts: 1063

Your wife sounds like a cool little lady!

Yep!

I was raised in a christian household, and it would kill my family to know this.

So, your family doesn't know yet, huh? Telling my mother was one of, if not the hardest thing I've ever had to do, but I am glad I did it.

2009-11-07 05:35:00

Author:
mrsupercomputer

Posts: 1335

Oh god...you pushed my button now. Philosophy is one of my most favorite subjects so I can go on forever about stuff like this.

Ok, ok, so you say your an atheist. I have no problem with atheist, I fact I find they are much more interesting than some hypocritical, brain-washed christians.

But, logically speaking, the idea of atheism is the belief that a God doesn't exist nor is existence intelligently designed. Obviously, you know this but tell me this, how do you determine if something exist or not? Human beings naturally based things on their senses, perception and reality of things.

So if they can't perceive it, they pretty much believe it's not there. That's what humans(for a while)thought about air, gravity and plenty of other things. But as you know, later discoveries have shown that not everything that exist is perceivable(ex. Dark matter, voids, etc). So, in my opinion, when an atheist "bases his life and reasoning" on the fact that pretty much everything is random and probable, and that they "think" that there isn't a God...well that just proves all the more that God(or a divine being or whatever)exist.

I mean think about...do you realize the impact that this so-called non-existence God has had on the world? To me, God is like gravity. Just because it isn't perceivable, doesn't mean it isn't there. So when some atheist say there couldn't possibly any kind of God, what can they really base that belief on? Even science will tell you you shouldn't based "everything" on your reality or perception.

Think about is this way. Now you've probably heard that there are around 6 billion people in the world. But can you imagine 6 billion people on one planet or in one place or something like that? Maybe the most someone has seen is maybe 10-100 million people at once. But have you seen 6 billion people before? I'm pretty sure you haven't. So how the heck do you know "for sure" if there is really 6 billion people? Open your imagination a bit.

So yeah, it's not that I have a problem with your belief, I just don't believe it. I do in fact believe that there is a being that has created all thing that exist. I'm sure as an atheist, you've heard that there are a limitless amount of realities. So why isn't it possible for all these realities to come from a single reality...called God? That's what I believe what God is. I believe he is a combination of all existing realities. Reality itself is generated from "something". Maybe from non-existence or dark matter or the nothingness that's in itself is something?

Ok, I'm getting a little tired of typing right now(and thinking lol). I hope I got my point across(uh I probably didn't so ask questions please so I can clear up stuff). I don't really believe in a particular religion. I believe all religions are significant in humans giving reason for their existence. Maybe its something we've developed through evolution/adaption. But regardless, you can't deny that religion has kept many people alive and civilized. Sorry I kinda went on more about "your" beliefs and everything rather than talking about my own.

2009-11-07 06:03:00

Author:
comishguy67

Posts: 849

Hmmm... interesting debate, if rather one-sided. I find it interesting how many atheists and agnostics (I will use those terms, thank you... see my "rant" below) come from roots of Catholicism. Myself having just last summer been baptized in Jesus Christ's name, but having a profound and personal hatred and distrust of the Catholic church (and really, most organized religions, for reasons already pointed to by others here).

But I walked an agnostic line for many years. I used to joke that it was the world's biggest cop-out... "I'm not saying there is, I'm not saying there isn't". And I know enough devout atheists to tell you that many of them are the most religious zealots I know. They work far more actively to "spread the word" than most Christians I've met.

As for the video... it's ridiculous crap like this that makes me cringe at society as a whole - on both sides of this argument. As stated here more than once now, Darwin's work does not discount or in any way disprove the existence of a higher power - it only sheds a scientific eye on a truly beautiful and elegant design in the nature of our world/universe. To dismiss it would be sad enough on it's own, but to preface it with what can only be regarded as slander is unconscionable.

Now...

And if people continue to insist on the terms "a-theist" and "a-gnostic", I'm going to continue to insist on passive, non-definitions for them - I won't define atheist as someone who actively believes in NO god, I'm going to define it as someone who simply DOESN'T believe in one. And let's just eschew it altogether when we can, because many people can't agree on the definition anyway. It's only a convenient label. Rationalist is an active term that actually has a meaning. I don't think that actively believing in God IS rational, so I feel it's a fitting term.

Not that devout religious people are INCAPABLE of being rational - that's not at all what I'm suggesting. Merely that "rationalIST" suggests the core of someone's worldview is empirical reason, which cannot by definition apply to anyone religious. So I'll take "rationalist".

Getting back to my own faith... I find that in a thread full of thoughtful, but impassioned opinions, that this is the only statement that came near to offending me. Because, what I have found in faith (a faith that I did not possess for many years of my life, and for which I often - almost daily - have questions such as those posed herein) it is as tangible to me as the air I breathe and the colors I see. And to stop believing in them seems as irrational as any argument you might lay before me. I very much consider my self a rational, thoughtful, even - dare I say - intelligent man. And there are many days that I question my own faith - especially when posed with such hard, empirical, scientific fact and the harshness of an overcrowded world. But in the end, I continue to come back to a state of grace that is nigh on impossible to define to anyone who has not experienced it. And that is what I find so incredibly profound about faith... when/if it does comes to you, there is no longer any doubt or reckoning. I do not always understand Him, and I certainly struggle to apply my firm belief in science and evolution to the teachings and writings of my forefathers. But I also try to bear in mind that they are just that... the interpretations, first oral then eventually written, of the same faith in God that I have found and experience every day, mixed with a bit of moral and communal steering for the betterment of mankind (or, in many cases, for the empowerment of an individual, or a nation, or a race).

And then there are days when I just think of the words of a slightly more modern prophet...

There are times when all the world's asleep,
the questions run too deep
for such a simple man.

Roger Hodgson - Supertramp

2009-11-07 06:04:00

Author:
v0rtex

Posts: 1878

?Everything is possible for him who believes.?
-Mark 9:23

I'm a Catholic. And for good reasons.

Let's start with what a stereotypical observer would see in the Catholic faith: "Huh? The world was made in 7 days? Pffft. More like 7 BILLION. Oh, and the ark? Yeah, it's a good kids story... but that's about it. A burning bush talking- ok, now that's just absurd. Can't you idiots see that your so-called 'prophecies' are just fantasy stories? I mean, do you guys really believe in the parting of the Red Sea, or even a small boy killing a giant with a rock? Heck, even Christ born on Christmas Day is bologna!! Your faith has NOTHING relevant for me to partake in!! NOTHING!!! Do you see my friends reading the Bible?! NO!! Is our government paying attention to your pathetic pleas?! NOO!! Do you really believe that a bearded-'hippie'-freak would cause suicide to save- what- our souls THOUSANDS OF YEARS LATER?!?! Hmph, I don't have time to waste with you freaks anyway; my wife's having an abortion right now."

What most people don't get about the church is that it's not just stories. In fact, it's WAAAYY more than just that. The Bible is just another form of teaching the word of God; it's not all 100% fact. Take the "7 days" theory, for example. Do you really think that a whole world could be built in 7 days? No, that'd just be silly. But what's even sillier is that some observers and critics take that as what we Catholics/Christians think. Most of the text in the Bible is spoken in parable, which is a form of story-telling. So the "7 days" theory, guess what? It's a form of exaggerating how long it took for the earth to form. Nothing, not even the most consistent scientific analysis, can pinpoint exactly when the earth was made. Why, they just presume that 4.6 billion years ago, the same time the universe was supposibly born, Earth was born as well.

It's not only the raw text that people usually mistranslate, but also our ideals. It's not our conquest in the world to make EVERYONE a Catholic/Christian. I mean, that'd be nice, but even God knows that'll be unlikely. It's our sworn duty as Catholics/Christians to spread the word of God throughout the world, and to act as God wanted us to. World peace? Absolutely. Brotherly love? Of course. Brotherly love in the "other" sense... not exactly. Many say that our set concious on gays & lesbians is that we must NEVER be near them and that they're hated by God. NO WAY in any sense is that true! I mean, being a ***/lesbian might be frowned upon in the faith, but that doesn't mean that you're not welcomed into it. Our choice to make our own decisions was God's intention, not his mistake. I mean, God had a choice to either condemn us to Hell for the rest of eternity, or to save us from that fate. He chose the latter of the two, knowing better. He could've easily gone the other direction if he wanted to. But no, he didn't. He chose to give us a second chance, to express his love & grace to us, his chosen people. He could've easily chosen, say, a fish, or even a turkey for his chosen being. Adam & Eve took the apple from the tree... but it's the decisions of their offspring that cause such agony.

Being in a set faith isn't for everyone. I have friends who aren't in the faith; I'm friends with lesbians, atheists, liberals, Jews, Islamics, radicalists, even Anti-Christians. But all are still great people, living healthy lifestyles and making good choices. Religion is an option, not a mandatory requirement. If you can find better ways of expressing God's love that suit you well, then, by God, do it. Being one in the faith is just one of the ways to seek God.

Never judge a book by it's cover; you'll never know what it's about until you open it and see it yourself.

Sincerely,
Outlaw-Jack (a.k.a., LBPC's "Jesus-Freak")

2009-11-07 06:10:00

Author:
Outlaw-Jack

Posts: 5757

I'm a Catholic. And for good reasons.

Whoa - Hope I didn't offend you man.

2009-11-07 06:13:00

Author:
v0rtex

Posts: 1878

i dont know but i think i might be the only one. im muslim done dusted i dont care about wat anything u people say it belive it all okay? good then. bye!

2009-11-07 07:11:00

Author:
Tawarf

Posts: 457

There is evidence for a frightening bottleneck in early human population. It's an incredible scenario. that early in our evolution as humans, we were on the edge of extinction. But something happened. The story of our species is a fascinating epic - we can trace our genetic history today, we know how the world was different, and we can determine the paths our common ancestors took to all corners of the world. Has anyone here done a cheek-swab and learned of their ancient lineage? I've been planning on doing one of these - National Geographic has a 100 dollar kit, but there are also far more in-depth ones that cost a hearty chunk of change. So... I'll probably go with Geographic's.

There's an amazing and enlightening documentary I saw on human genetic history, I'll have to hunt it down.

Your referring to Mitochondrial "Eve" right? Mitochondrial DNA is passed down only on the mother's side and every living human today has the exact same Mitochondrial DNA so we are all linked to a single female somewhere from Africa when the human population was nearly wiped out. (At least as I recall from multiple TV shows - feel free to elaborate/correct if I've misunderstood)

2009-11-07 10:01:00

Author:
Morgana25

Posts: 5983

Ah, one of my favourite topics

Right then, I know that almost everyone will fit into either one of these categories; atheism, theism or agnosticism. Funnily enough, I don't.

I still feel that religion is completely false in its perception of God, and if we're talking about Christianity, it contradicts itself far too much. How can you have an all knowing creator and freedom of choice at the same time? And just a silly one - how can God condemn you to eternal pain, punishment, suffering and torture, yet still love you? Of course, I know with some people religion helps in a moralistic way, however, I really hate fundamentalists of any religion.

Now, onto Atheism. Whilst I still think it's on the right path, I personally think it is an arrogance to say there is no God - full stop. Where's the proof? There is no proof whatsoever to say that God does or does not exist, so nobody can really question the existence of a higher power.

I personally think it's better to hope than to believe in a God, that way your mind is not set on a single path - there is no God, or God must exist. I personally hope there is a higher power that, well, does something for us but I have no proof, so therefore I am not sure.

And no, I am not fully agnostic since I do not sway between religion and atheism. I am neither. If you know what I mean 0__0

So, um, yeah, that's my rant...

2009-11-07 10:19:00

Author:
KoRnDawwg

Posts: 1424

I grew up in a christian school all my life, or several for constantly being kicked out [me being the only one questioning their distinct belief system]. Over the years I've come to the conclusion that the god Christians, Jews, Muslims, or any other religion worships is representing the same higher source that we devote our lives to. So basically, I'm atheist, in a way where I'm totally against religion and ESPECIALLY the ones that tell you when something is "wrong". However, I DO believe there is some higher power, or force. I don't like labeling it or guessing it's purpose or what it does.

2009-11-07 10:42:00

Author:
Voodeedoo

Posts: 724

how can God condemn you to eternal pain, punishment, suffering and torture, yet still love you?

i once asked a religious person that when i was a wiiman, and they told me that GOD doesnt put you in hell, SATAN does. apparently man is doomed and worshiping so-and-so's god is the only optional way out.

2009-11-07 10:44:00

Author:
Voodeedoo

Posts: 724

Oh god...you pushed my button now. So if they can't perceive it, they pretty much believe it's not there. That's what humans(for a while)thought about air, gravity and plenty of other things. But as you know, later discoveries have shown that not everything that exist is perceivable(ex. Dark matter, voids, etc). So, in my opinion, when an atheist "bases his life and reasoning" on the fact that pretty much everything is random and probable, and that they "think" that there isn't a God...well that just proves all the more that God(or a divine being or whatever)exist.
.
i dont believe in dark matter except for black holes(which are percievable)& whats a void? does that mean space it's self? how come no type of light in the light spectrum can find it(dark matter)? I believe in a god but im not religous. I went to a normal school with a pious headmaster & they tried to brainwash me so i hate christianity. I dont believe complex animals evolved from viruses because i dont see how you can evolve functional organs & a circulatory system.

2009-11-07 11:38:00

Author:
lifeiscrapislife

Posts: 396

You know, I think much of what is written in various holy books is quite true in a way.
For instance it makes sense to forbid certain foods if you consider the time, place and existing cultural norms. However that also means that what has been written down a few hundred or thousand years ago doesn't necessarily make sense in this day and age, because of the technological and sanitary advancements since than.
Rules for behaviour are equally understandable when you consider who came up with the rules (I don't mean god here, but rather the "prophets" and anyone who played a role in the making of a religion, whether or not they have been inspired by a higher being is a different question). Time and place or origin give in most cases a logical reason for all rules stated. That means you can't decry the books for being wrong, but you can rightfully (and respectfully!) disagree with the appliance of these rules today, if they have not been adapted to the present circumstances.

In any case the worst thing a religious person can do is disrespect another religion or even go as far as ridiculing it. They harm their own believe, moreover they are likely to disobey the rules set forth in their holy scripture. Most of them include the rule that you should respect other believes!
The same is true for people who do not follow a religious believe. Moreover anyone who claims that religion is unnecessary today, because we can explain everything through science, has not understood the importance of religion, that it helps people make sense of the world and gives them something to hold on to.
Religion itself is not harmful, what people make out of it can be harmful and potentially dangerous.
Therefor I think that the most sensible thing anyone can do is respect other people believes, try to understand their reasoning and give them all the freedom necessary to be religious and to live in accord with the rules their religion gives them. Banning certain aspects of a religion (ie headscarves) is not helpful if you want to live together, side by side in a society. At the same time religious people have to accept that not everyone can or wants to live in their way and they shouldn't be offended by it.
Obviously everything should be limited by non-religous laws and moral rules, that treat everyone equal, but also limit religion to a certain extent, because, as I said earlier, some of the rules in religious texts are not applicable anymore.

That is probably the hardest challenge we, as a whole, face today: How to deal with religion?

Than again there have been several empires in India for example in which all religion could thrive, because the rulers (some of which were Buddhists but not all) declared that all religions should be treated equally, so the question really isn't as new as we might think it is. More importantly there is a workable solution and that is respect.

2009-11-07 11:44:00

Author:
Syroc

Posts: 3193

Your referring to Mitochondrial "Eve" right? Mitochondrial DNA is passed down only on the mother's side and every living human today has the exact same Mitochondrial DNA so we are all linked to a single female somewhere from Africa when the human population was nearly wiped out. (At least as I recall from multiple TV shows - feel free to elaborate/correct if I've misunderstood)

Pretty close! The dna that's of interest to us in learning our ancient lineage is non-recombined dna. There are two sources of this - part of the dna in the Y chromosome is not recombined (mixed between two parents), but is passed down directly, unaltered, from a father to his offspring. So we can trace our fathers through this non-recombined dna in the Y chromosome. This is "Adam" dna.
The other non-recombined dna is found in mitochondria, which is passed directly from the mother. So this would be the "eve" dna as you mentioned.

dna copying is far more accurate than digital copying we do on our computers every day. But there are still occasional mistakes called mutations.
These mutations are PRESERVED - every mistake makes its way through our family tree. So they act as markers, we can trace these mutations by mapping the non-recombined dna of people, particularly indigenous people, all over the world, and track their mutation markers.

This is one of the ways in which we've discovered that we have a common African ancestor only 60,000 years ago. This is around the time when a very interesting thing happened. Our population was very small, but a new gene became clear around this time, and this is the "speech" gene. This is likely the time when we began to talk to each other. This is also the time when we branched out and went our separate ways, spreading out and migrating to all corners of the earth. The landscape was different. We managed to get all over through land bridges that no longer exist - which explains remote indigenous people, including the ancient natives of Australia. But we can continue to trace our genetic history even farther than that, closer to 150,000 years ago.

But that period at about 60,000 years ago was the beginning of one incredible, epic story.

By the way, kind of random: This is an amazing video of a computer simulation revealing the process by which dna is copied:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5VefaI0LrgE

Okay, so I'm getting a bit off-topic now. This shouldn't have anything to do with religion. It's a crying shame that in this day and age it DOES, at least regarding organized religion. This information is hard for many devout religious people to handle. It can't be true. it flies in the face of most major religious texts. I'm still trying to hunt down this wonderful documentary I saw. In it, a scientist travels the globe trying to nail down answers to some of our ancient genetic mysteries. The way to do this is to discover dna markers in indigenous peoples - the few that still exist in the world today. Many of these people had a very hard time with the information that this guy brought with him, but he was a sweet, honest man who tried very hard to contextualize it for people who often were not likely prepared to hear of such things.

In his travels he discovered a man - I forgot where exactly, somewhere in the middle east I think - who seems to be almost of almost perfectly preserved ancestry, the dna of his family unchanged for thousands of years. He possibly contains in him some of the most important dna in any living human today. To look at him he really does appear to be a mixture of every race.

I'm going to keep trying to hunt down this documentary. It's an eye opening experience for ANYONE, religious or not, but I can imagine this documentary being a door-pounding wakeup call to anyone who has never questioned their bible/koran/torah/iliad/Blade Runner blu ray.

@Vortex:
Firstly, let me apologize for (nearly) offending you. Secondly, let me thank you for joining this thread, it really felt for a while like a bunch of secular joes preaching to the choir! That can make it intimidating in the least for religious people to enter the discussion. And then you end up with me and Jagrevi arguing semantics!

To further explain my explanation - What I'm really pointing out is the "ist" in "rationalist", much moreso than the "rational". A rationalist would be someone for whom their very CORE beliefs and values are based on the empirical rather than the spiritual. You took a bit of offense to my statement that religion is irrational - and unfortunately here I think there's stigma attached to the term "irrational", so maybe "rationalist" ISN'T the best term, but I digress - What I'm saying is that I view religious spirituality as fundamentally emotional. This is a deeply powerful thing, but I believe that any strong emotional state is irrational. Love is irrational. But it is also powerful, important, fundamental to our experience as humans.

I believe that rationalists are all quite irrational at regular intervals in their lives, as we can't escape the fact that we're human.
I believe that all religious people are quite rational as well, as reason is just a major part of us.

So I see the rationalist as more of the probing robot, insisting on the "rational", the "empirical" to define the core of their worldview. Though this cold robot can also be found with an irrationally quivering lip, wiping the tears off the viewfinder of his backyard telescope.
Meanwhile the religious person is more the person in love, emotionally awed by what his faith has brought him. But this divinely inspired emotionalist can also be found questioning the lack of reason that seems to be on every single page of the daily newspaper.

So please don't take offense at my use of "irrational", I don't mean it to have any negative connotation - it's the "IST" that interests me, as the difference between a devout religious person and a devout rationalist is simply the core base of belief - for one it is faith in higher things; for the other it is the empirical world.

2009-11-07 11:46:00

Author:
Teebonesy

Posts: 1937

Hmmm, I've read about 50% of what has come since I went to bed, but there were a couple of bits in jagrevi's response I thought I'd pick up on:

However, I think the inference that without evidence both concepts should be given equal water is something to challenge. Now, if you're a strict empiricist - in the sense you would say the same for the existence of Russell's Teapot (or, it's modern day equivalent "the invisible flying spaghetti monster"), then I think that's the end of that.

I don't put any weight on any particular religion as being correct. I don't believe in any of their gods. But I won't sit here and disbelieve the possibility of a god or gods. It's simply a case of accepting that our knowledge of the universe is incomplete. Just because there is no sound evidence for or against something does not mean it doesn't exist - it's simply an unknown. We'd never progress if we didn't question the unknown.

edit - I realised I stopped writing in the middle of a sentence here. I'll work out what I was trying to say and post it again

the question is whether or not there is a God. We're asking whether or not the cosmic "first cause" (assuming there is one as well), is an intelligent being capable of complex thought.

Woah! Back up there! The concept of a "god" does not mean a being who essentially created the universe. Far from it. As far as I'm aware the vast majority of gods that people have believed in are not creators. In my head we are talking about the idea of intelligence that transcends our understanding of the universe and probably had some hand in bringing about our existance. I would go as far as to say that influence could even be bringing about the conditions to create life on this planet, rather than necessarily "creating everything out of nothing".

Actually, if someone takes the stance of "god created everything out of nothing, but if there was nothing, where was god" approach, that kinda feels to me like you are defining god in a very specific way than directly leads to undermining the very concept. It doesn't feel very open minded - hence my far more flexible viewpoint on what a god would be.

at school i wasnt allowed to wear a hat but a muslims allowed to wear a whole headscarf

discrimination
Is this a joke?

2009-11-07 12:18:00

Author:
rtm223

Posts: 6497

Slightly off-topic, so apologies in advance...

I think the debate going on here shows a lot of depth and maturity, and it's a credit to ALL members who've posted. Very interesting.

Us humans are curious beasts, aren't we? Always looking for answers, always needing to know how and why things are the way they are. I wonder where we'll be in the future - we've come a long way from throwing rocks at the moon or dancing in the hope of rain.

It's difficult to measure 'progress'. Some would say we take two steps back for every step forward, but just by listening to others' opinions and being considerate to each other is vitally important.

Good stuff, thank you.

2009-11-07 12:36:00

Author:
MrsSpookyBuz

Posts: 1492

dancing in the hope of rain.

We now know that rain is summoned by the washing of our cars.

2009-11-07 12:38:00

Author:
Rabid-Coot

Posts: 6728

Just checking back in...

*Looks around and nods in approval*

2009-11-07 13:04:00

Author:
supersickie

Posts: 1366

2009-11-07 13:07:00

Author:
Tawarf

Posts: 457

Now, onto Atheism. Whilst I still think it's on the right path, I personally think it is an arrogance to say there is no God - full stop. Where's the proof? There is no proof whatsoever to say that God does or does not exist, so nobody can really question the existence of a higher power.

Where is the proof for unicorns and fairies? Do you find it arrogant to say these creatures do not exist? Or, do you feel that it's wrong to make the assumption that they do exist, when there is no reliable evidence to support such a claim?

That is how I feel about God, it's a very big assumption. Sure, a God could exist, but until there is evidence, I'll live my life feeling that God, like many other mythical creatures, does not exist.

2009-11-07 13:11:00

Author:
mrsupercomputer

Posts: 1335

I think that u making this thread was an absolute bad idea. especially that joke that said musilms are allowd to wear scarf and all that. for go sake! is that all u **** people see us as? terrorists? do you really think we all are bad people? do you?

Please don't use terms like "all you **** people". That merely implies that all of us are biggoted. Most of the people here are having a respectful conversation about religion and it's quite offensive to make such a statement. Have you even bothered to read the majority of the posts on this thread? I'd guess not, if you think everyone is bashing muslims.

Now I agree wholeheartedly that the joke was in bad taste, and I understand why it's upset you. However, for you to imply all of us are ignorant because of one single statement is as bad.

There is nothing wrong with the topic of discussion, if we make discussion of religious beliefs taboo, then that just promotes ignorance and misunderstanding.

@mrsupercomputer: I totally get your point, but I personally feel there is a slight difference between the concept of fairies and the concept of some deity... but I can't really explain why...

Bet that's convinced you, eh?

2009-11-07 13:21:00

Author:
rtm223

Posts: 6497

Okay. i apologise for offending u all it was really only to the guy that sent out that REALLY upsetting joke...

2009-11-07 13:32:00

Author:
Tawarf

Posts: 457

I'd actually like to continue this topic about the terminology a little bit.

The majority of the population today is religious. It's why the word "atheism" is "atheism". But to be an atheist today, you tend to have to be someone who QUESTIONS the status quo. Someone who puts a lot of weight behind science and the quantifiable. Someone willing to concede a popular scientific theory can be incorrect as new evidence comes about.

So I would posit that MOST atheists likely leave SOME room for the possibility of existence of SOME type of God. Like Bill Maher puts it: "I don't know." He's not saying "I believe there is no God whatsoever", nor is he even going so far as to say "There might be", he's simply saying "I do not know." Does he instantly receive the "agnostic" label because of this?

Now I'm not talking about the strict and specific God that Jagrevi defined as an intelligent catalyst creator. But ANY sort of god, of which today we may have no empirical evidence.

I just have a big problem with the lines we draw between atheist and agnostic, and there seem to be a decent number of atheists here (of which I consider myself one), and I'd like to ask the question:

Do you leave ANY room whatsoever for SOME possibility of a creator, even an intelligent one?

I feel I must, as unlikely as I believe the possibility personally. Perhaps that makes me an agnostic, but at the same time I do not believe in any god. As I mentioned earlier, I believe we have created a name and a manifestation for our own sense of awe, and that name is god.

Think about this common ground we all have. If the rationalists spoke of awe and replaced the word temporarily with "god", imagine the conversation they might have with a spiritual person of faith.
God is all around us. You experience god in the personal, in the external, in nature, in the unknown, in the minuscule, in the massive. I'm sure that we would find a great deal of common ground.

Or, alternately it might just be awkward. Let's flip it around:

"awe is all around us, would you agree?"
"yes I would! I experience awe often, especially when I get out of the house for a while."
"yes, me too, me too. What do you feel about that time Awe smote the sodomites?"
"....wh..."
"That was pretty Awesome, right?"

2009-11-07 13:34:00

Author:
Teebonesy

Posts: 1937

That's cool Tawarf. I just think this thread has a lot of potential, so I don't want to see it devolve into anything but a respectful discussion of religious beliefs. As I said, I totally understand why you were offended by the joke - I found it to be in poor taste and I'm not a muslim.

2009-11-07 13:37:00

Author:
rtm223

Posts: 6497

So, your family doesn't know yet, huh? Telling my mother was one of, if not the hardest thing I've ever had to do, but I am glad I did it.

Yup. This is a concern of mine. My parents are divorced, and my father had a falling out with Christianity because of this. He remains agnostic to this day, but was very religious prior. My mother on the other hand, always asks what I will do with my children if I never attend church. Gut wrench, anyone? I think she could probably follow the signs, but I think she chooses not to see them. I'm not looking forward to when I have to tell her, and it'll probably end in tears.

And just a silly one - how can God condemn you to eternal pain, punishment, suffering and torture, yet still love you? Of course, I know with some people religion helps in a moralistic way, however, I really hate fundamentalists of any religion.

Well, I don't agree with the following, but: many religions would argue (with some merit) that pain, punishment, suffering, and torture are devices used to test your faith. To help you grow in your faith, etc. Is there evidence for this? Well, probably not, but as you said that doesn't make it untrue.

Fundamentalists - the source of many, many, many problems. On both sides. Hate, any way you spin it, is still hate.

In any case the worst thing a religious person can do is disrespect another religion or even go as far as ridiculing it. They harm their own believe, moreover they are likely to disobey the rules set forth in their holy scripture. Most of them include the rule that you should respect other believes!
The same is true for people who do not follow a religious believe. Moreover anyone who claims that religion is unnecessary today, because we can explain everything through science, has not understood the importance of religion, that it helps people make sense of the world and gives them something to hold on to.
Religion itself is not harmful, what people make out of it can be harmful and potentially dangerous.
Therefor I think that the most sensible thing anyone can do is respect other people believes, try to understand their reasoning and give them all the freedom necessary to be religious and to live in accord with the rules their religion gives them. Banning certain aspects of a religion (ie headscarves) is not helpful if you want to live together, side by side in a society. At the same time religious people have to accept that not everyone can or wants to live in their way and they shouldn't be offended by it.

This. Thank you. This is exactly how we should approach this topic. With an acceptance for others' beliefs. It's the only way to have truly productive debate. I think I may add this in some for or another to the OP.

@tawarf - I'm sorry that you had to come across lifeiscrapislife's post like that. It does not reflect the tone and discussion of many pages before it. It may have been a joke, but it was an insensitive one, and you would do well to not dwell on it. I direct you to the message that Syroc wrote above (the section that I quoted). I hope there's no hard feelings. I at least respect your beliefs, regardless of how I feel about Islam.

(I will do my best to eradicate any truly offensive posts, unless we can resolve them intelligently)

2009-11-07 13:43:00

Author:
comphermc

Posts: 5338

Thxs rtm, i dont want to be in this thread in case i get really offended again...

2009-11-07 13:44:00

Author:
Tawarf

Posts: 457

Thxs rtm, i dont want to be in this thread in case i get really offended again...

Probably a good idea... lol. We (the main contributors) definitely don't want to offend you, but that doesn't mean someone else won't come along and say something stupid.

2009-11-07 13:47:00

Author:
comphermc

Posts: 5338

Do you leave ANY room whatsoever for SOME possibility of a creator, even an intelligent one?

Of course!

Yup. This is a concern of mine. My parents are divorced, and my father had a falling out with Christianity because of this. He remains agnostic to this day, but was very religious prior. My mother on the other hand, always asks what I will do with my children if I never attend church. Gut wrench, anyone. I think she could probably follow the signs, but I think she chooses not to see them. Not looking forward to when I have to tell her, and it'll probably end in tears.
)

Well, it will definitely be hard. I remember that I didn't really plan on telling my mother, but after I quit my job at a religious organization, she confronted me in a restaurant parking lot of all places.

We stood in that parking lot for over an hour. At one point she poked me several times in the chest and holding back tears, she asked "Do you believe Jesus is your Lord and Savior." Right then, I knew it would be easier to lie and to say yes, but I just couldn't do it. So, I said, "No, mom, no I don't."

This led to a lot of frustration and anger. My mother broke down and started crying "I failed. I always said that even if I fail at everything in life, as long as my kids believe in God and follow Jesus, I've done something right. I've failed." She went on to accuse my wife and friends of brainwashing me and all that.

This resulted in the next 3 or 4 phone calls being rather tense, with each one spiraling into a religious debate. It was an extremely tough time, but eventually my mother moved past it. Her visits are still a bit awkward, but we usually avoid the topic of religion altogether, which keeps it civil.

So, all of this rambling is basically my way of saying that, yes it will probably end in tears and it'll be rough, but you'll get through it.

2009-11-07 14:02:00

Author:
mrsupercomputer

Posts: 1335

I've heard many accounts of people saying that telling their parents they don't believe in religion is actually harder than coming out of the closet. There's a general stigma associated with non-believers/atheists (in the U.S. at least) which goes something like "Non believers = People with no morals", which is an insidious form of discrimination and stereotyping IMO.

2009-11-07 14:10:00

Author:
Gilgamesh

Posts: 2536

I'm atheist, in a way where I'm totally against religion and ESPECIALLY the ones that tell you when something is "wrong". However, I DO believe there is some higher power, or force. I don't like labeling it or guessing it's purpose or what it does.

Wow, you're just like meeez!

I thought I was the only one!

2009-11-07 14:42:00

Author:
KoRnDawwg

Posts: 1424

Regarding the previous mentioned so-called 'joke', this is why we need to be quite sensitive about what we write.

The debate can be quite emotive, but perhaps more understanding and appreciation will lead to less ignorance from all of us. The odd stray word or flippant remark can easily offend, so I'm pleased that was quickly sorted.

Let's be frank here: there are events going on globally at the moment that could cause offense to people of all races and religions. Is it intrinsic hatred for someone or something different to ourselves? Is it pure ignorance or oblivion? Whatever it is, it affects 'them' as well as 'us' (whoever happens to be the 'them' and 'us' for any particular issue).

So, like mentioned previously, feel free to debate and learn, and to give your opinions in a respectful, considerate manner.

For me, I care little whether you are atheist, Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, Seikh or any other of the major or minor groups. You're here, you're human and for the very fact you can put your rational thoughts across, you are welcome. We may disagree, we may choose not to care, but you're all acquaintances and friends, and I care a great deal about that.

2009-11-07 15:02:00

Author:
MrsSpookyBuz

Posts: 1492

I'm going to keep trying to hunt down this documentary. It's an eye opening experience for ANYONE, religious or not, but I can imagine this documentary being a door-pounding wakeup call to anyone who has never questioned their bible/koran/torah/iliad/Blade Runner blu ray. OMG That made me laugh, thank you.

@Vortex:
Firstly, let me apologize for (nearly) offending you. Secondly, let me thank you for joining this thread, it really felt for a while like a bunch of secular joes preaching to the choir! That can make it intimidating in the least for religious people to enter the discussion. And then you end up with me and Jagrevi arguing semantics!

To further explain my explanation - What I'm really pointing out is the "ist" in "rationalist", much moreso than the "rational". A rationalist would be someone for whom their very CORE beliefs and values are based on the empirical rather than the spiritual. You took a bit of offense to my statement that religion is irrational - and unfortunately here I think there's stigma attached to the term "irrational", so maybe "rationalist" ISN'T the best term, but I digress - What I'm saying is that I view religious spirituality as fundamentally emotional. This is a deeply powerful thing, but I believe that any strong emotional state is irrational. Love is irrational. But it is also powerful, important, fundamental to our experience as humans.

I believe that rationalists are all quite irrational at regular intervals in their lives, as we can't escape the fact that we're human.
I believe that all religious people are quite rational as well, as reason is just a major part of us.

So I see the rationalist as more of the probing robot, insisting on the "rational", the "empirical" to define the core of their worldview. Though this cold robot can also be found with an irrationally quivering lip, wiping the tears off the viewfinder of his backyard telescope.
Meanwhile the religious person is more the person in love, emotionally awed by what his faith has brought him. But this divinely inspired emotionalist can also be found questioning the lack of reason that seems to be on every single page of the daily newspaper.

So please don't take offense at my use of "irrational", I don't mean it to have any negative connotation - it's the "IST" that interests me, as the difference between a devout religious person and a devout rationalist is simply the core base of belief - for one it is faith in higher things; for the other it is the empirical world.Hehe, no problem Teebo... for the record, I was not offended. I just wanted to be clear on the fact that my faith and my ability for reason and rational thought - while often at odds with one another - are not mutually exclusive. I do know way too many "religious" people, however, for whom I cannot say the same. And I guess that's why I wanted to chime in there. My sister and her family, for instance, are devout (what I still call "bible-thumpin") Christians who believe every word of both testaments of their Bible to be God's holy word. They are offended at even an implication that a book, written by men, may no longer be 100% relevant 3500 years after it was written. I have always had a great deal of trouble with this sort of lemming-like thinking.

2009-11-07 15:11:00

Author:
v0rtex

Posts: 1878

let me remind you of an earlier thing i said...

there is no awnser.

...even if there is a god...he isn't happy at the moment for sure!i meen...
we are destroying our planet.
we are killing people because of their beliefs.
we aren't trying to get an alternate fuel source...another 20 yrs and we will pretty much destroy the earth!...and any economy!

so why are we babbling about pety religion?

something made the universe.
we don't know why,we don't know what,and we'll probably never know!
and people are fighting over something we DON'T even know...its stupid!

...i know this probably offended some people but...you know its true!

2009-11-07 16:57:00

Author:
theswweet

Posts: 2468

i dont believe in dark matter except for black holes(which are percievable)& whats a void? does that mean space it's self? how come no type of light in the light spectrum can find it(dark matter)? I believe in a god but im not religous. I went to a normal school with a pious headmaster & they tried to brainwash me so i hate christianity. I dont believe complex animals evolved from viruses because i dont see how you can evolve functional organs & a circulatory system.

Dark Matter is more theoretical. Some scientists believe it's the matter that emits the dark energy that we perceive as emptiness/nothingness. A void is pretty much the same thing as a vacuum. A place in space where no matter or particles of any kind exist. Light itself is the combination of all "colors/hues. Black is literally the human perception of nothingness.

2009-11-07 17:07:00

Author:
comishguy67

Posts: 849

I think that u making this thread was an absolute bad idea. especially that joke that said musilms are allowd to wear scarf and all that. for go sake! is that all u **** people see us as? terrorists? do you really think we all are bad people? do you?

Yes. Because he clearly said that wearing a headscarf = Terrorist. He also said that you are clearly all bad people. What he definitely wasn't implying was that he finds it unfair that one group of people be allowed to wear a headscarf, albeit it due to religious belief, and yet he can't wear whatever it is he wants to wear.

In a way, maybe that is discrimination. It's religious yes, but if one group of people are allowed, then other people should be allowed similar things; people should be allowed to wear it for their faith, but equally if someone wants to wear something of a similar style, they should be allowed. It's no different.

I have had this debate many times in EP at school, in Blackburn, which is one of the area's in the UK with one of the highest muslim and black populations. Therefore there are many different races and skin colors in my classes. This has been brought up before, and everyone has agreed that we shouldn't nescassarily be forced into changing how things are done and changing rules for a foreign faith, as it isn't a faith that originates from this country - we have our own beliefs, we don't go to other countries and impose them on you.

Finally, i don't think that comment he made was there as a joke or to provoke. It may just have been bad wording, but i think you saw it and decided you wanted to take that comment and interpret it as you did. I do not believe it was in any way aimed as an insult, YOU interpreted it that way. Now let the people whoa aren't getting angry over nothing have their fun. I'm going to listen to Iron Maiden. Cheerio.

Edit: Also, if you try to argue with me and say that i too am racist, i will:
a) Tear apart whatever argument you make, because i am in no way racist, though i am interested to see if you believe i am, like you believe the other guy is.
b)i will ignore whatever you say unless you learn to spell and sue grammar.

2009-11-07 17:08:00

Author:
Unknown User

Iron, we are not here to argue, so be careful with how you are wording your posts. The "edit" makes it look like you are looking for a fight. This is a heated discussion, not an argument thread. Your opinions can be shared - that's fine - but make sure your motivations are not solely to shoot holes in others' opinions. We are on thin ice by merely letting this thread exist...

That said, you make some nice points. They may not be the nicest way to present your case, but I'd agree with most of what you intended to say. The issue was already resolved for the most part, so let's try not to exacerbate the issue any more.

2009-11-07 17:24:00

Author:
comphermc

Posts: 5338

Yes, please keep it civil guys. This thread will be promptly locked if there is any sign of degeneration. Arguing should be left to PMs when possible.

2009-11-07 17:33:00

Author:
Gilgamesh

Posts: 2536

I think that u making this thread was an absolute bad idea. especially that joke that said musilms are allowd to wear scarf and all that. for go sake! is that all u **** people see us as? terrorists? do you really think we all are bad people? do you?

WHAT! that wasn't a joke:eek: i just didnt like my school having double standards. your the 1 talking about terrorists

2009-11-07 17:39:00

Author:
lifeiscrapislife

Posts: 396

Dark Matter is more theoretical. Some scientists believe it's the matter that emits the dark energy that we perceive as emptiness/nothingness. A void is pretty much the same thing as a vacuum. A place in space where no matter or particles of any kind exist. Light itself is the combination of all "colors/hues. Black is literally the human perception of nothingness.

dark energy? i always thought of it as empty space, even though theres small amounts of gas

2009-11-07 17:43:00

Author:
lifeiscrapislife

Posts: 396

Now, I'm going to pick up on this, not to put down someone else's opinions, but I think it leads on to some important aspects of faith in a multicultural, multifaith society:

it isn't a faith that originates from this country - we have our own beliefs, we don't go to other countries and impose them on you.

Interesting point but I'm confused... Which is the predominate religious belief that originates in England? I think I missed that one

Seriously though, your point about forcing beliefs onto others is very much something that I agree with, but certainly not in the way you say. For a muslim to be able to wear their headscarf as part of their religion is perfectly reasonable. Same with a seikh and their turban.

That is NOT someone forcing their beliefs onto others. They haven't "come to our contry and imposed" anything upon us. To be forbidding them from carrying out their own beliefs would be imposing our beliefs upon them, which to me is wrong. Especially when you consider that them carrying out their own beliefs has no negative effects upon us. What motive is there to deny them of their rights? No one benefits from that.

To go back to lifeiscrapislife's point: To say that a headscarf or turban is analogous to someone wanting to wear anything they want is completely missing the point. Wanting to wear a hat is not the same thing as wearing a garment that represents your religious beliefs. Comparing someone's right to express fashion to someone's right to express their religion are not in any way comparable and in my head there is no double standard.

Now, you can argue with that all you want, you are entitled to your opinion, but to deny people the right to express their religion sickens me to my very core, so I whole heartedly support schools having exceptions to their rules to accomodate for our current multicultural society.

Now this is certainly not looking for a fight, if anyone's views go against this then that is fine and please post your opinions, but keep it civil.

BTW, Dark matter is a theoretical concept that has come about from the concept that the matter that we can detect in the universe does not match the effect of gravity. Therefore there (supposedly) needs to be matter out there, with mass, that we cannot detect. That's the idea anyway.

2009-11-07 18:19:00

Author:
rtm223

Posts: 6497

Interesting point but I'm confused... Which is the predominate religious belief that originates in England? I think I missed that one

Church of England depending on how you define originates.

CoE certainly originated here but its basis originated elsewhere.

2009-11-07 18:34:00

Author:
Rabid-Coot

Posts: 6728

Now, I'm going to pick up on this, not to put down someone else's opinions, but I think it leads on to some important aspects of faith in a multicultural, multifaith society:

Interesting point but I'm confused... Which is the predominate religious belief that originates in England? I think I missed that one

2009-11-07 18:40:00

Author:
lifeiscrapislife

Posts: 396

Of course I appreciate that you weren't saying that they shouldn't be allowed to do so, that was more related to ironmaidenfan's comments about forcing beliefs onto others.

I do still feel that there is no comparison between a headscarf worn for religious reasons and a hat that is worn for fashion. Now if your school is really, really cold, that you need to wear a hat, then that's a different matter altogether

2009-11-07 19:00:00

Author:
rtm223

Posts: 6497

I'm a Christian, and proud of it!

2009-11-07 19:56:00

Author:
Shockwave4

Posts: 200

Wow...Reading through this thread, this has to be one of the most interesting and fun debates ever created on this forum...

2009-11-07 20:47:00

Author:
KoRnDawwg

Posts: 1424

2009-11-07 21:11:00

Author:
Morgana25

Posts: 5983

Wow...Reading through this thread, this has to be one of the most interesting and fun debates ever created on this forum...

We have had like 3 religion threads that instantly get 10 pages in a day

Religion is a very good thing to debate about. you could go on forever

2009-11-07 22:00:00

Author:
Snrm

Posts: 6419

2009-11-07 22:05:00

Author:
MrsSpookyBuz

Posts: 1492

Well, I think it's going to take some more appearance by Jagrevi, Teeb, rtm, and Ranger to keep this one at the same intellectual level. I consider myself a smart guy, but they are on a whole other plane.

I think I've discussed (or at least mentioned) everything I was thinking about when I started the thread, but I'm still interested in hearing what others think.

I'm just curious, is there anyone out there in LBPC-land that believes evolution to be false? I would like to hear why you think it's false. Keep in mind that evolution ≠ biogenesis. In this, I mean that evolution tells us nothing about where life came from, just how life came to be as it is now.

2009-11-07 22:19:00

Author:
comphermc

Posts: 5338

Agreed Korn.

The thing about organized religions that I just can't deal with is most (not all mind you) seem to have a built in "must convert the non believer" component to them. Now while in terms of the belief system that's promoting itself to non believers this is done for the non believers own good and proponents do this out the "goodness" their faith tells them they should have, I have a tough time not getting a little annoyed by it. While I have no faith nor belief in god, I also respect that some people do and I don't feel like I have to persuade anyone else not to believe in god. I'd just like to have that courtesy reciprocated and for some faiths that isn't an option.

Definitely one of the most important points to bring up about organized religion. I've always seen missionary work as a moral grey area. Not to denigrate the positive things they do, but morally it's... "complex."

On the one hand, missionaries are bringing aid with them, helping out indigenous people who might be starving or having a difficult time getting by.
But on the other hand they're crushing the ancient traditions of these people by converting them. Many of these people who are being converted are important living remnants of an ancient time. To take away their unique traditions and values which have been passed down, which have survived, intact, on a tiny scale, over so many generations, is to me a crime against humanity.

We shouldn't spread out and "modernize" every tribe and indigenous people we can find. In fact we can learn a great deal about ourselves through these people, as long as we don't make such efforts to crush who they are. The work that many missionaries do is greatly disturbing to me, and what disturbs me the most is that the work is done with the greatest of intentions, behind the learning that it's one of the most positive things you could do for your fellow man - "spread the word of [insert prophet]".

This is where I have to draw a line. Everyone should be free to worship. But bringing aid to people, many of whom do worship, and attaching a frightening price to that aid - "drop everything you've ever believed in, and convert to our religion" - is officially "morally questionable" in my book.

2009-11-07 22:31:00

Author:
Teebonesy

Posts: 1937

did ANYONE see my post...*sigh*

2009-11-07 23:30:00

Author:
theswweet

Posts: 2468

did ANYONE see my post...*sigh*

Sorry about that, we all saw your post, the text was quite large as a I recall.

But the purpose of this thread IS to discuss this, one of the most controversial and highly-debated topics in the world.

the very fact that there are no solid answers is one of the very reasons why the topic stands the test of time, and we're having the same discourse now as Plato and Socrates did thousands of years ago.

Debate's healthy! Argument generally not so much. But debate, discussion, open conversation? More please!

2009-11-07 23:36:00

Author:
Teebonesy

Posts: 1937

OK, so my opinion on religion is a bit complicated. As a rule, I'm open to most religions - there are certain doctrines that I hold strong moral objections to of course, but the generally benevolent religions, sure, I'm open to them. I'm an atheist agnostic (NB: Atheist=Doesn't believe in God, Atheist Agnostic=Doesn't really believe in God but is open to there being one, Theist Agnostic=Believes there is a God but doesn't know which one, Theist=Believes in A/Some deity/ies).

There are some things that I do morally object to as a whole and I'm sure they have been discussed already. I firmly believe that no child should be brought up following the dogma of a particular religion. I am sceptical as to whether people really even have complete self-awareness and comprehension of the consequences of what they do until at least 11/12, and, certainly, only a small percentage of the population can really make a rational decision about their religion based on the knowledge of the religion itself (and not just that other people follow that religion) before the age of 11/12.

I can really confirm this in the case of one of the Sikh people in my school. He didn't really believe in the Sikh religion verbatim, but believed its principles. Mid-way through a philosophical debate with him, I asked if he could explain why it was he wore a turban. The response was extremely hazy and didn't really sound like he knew what he was saying - he was just following the tradition of his parents without knowing why. If I were brought up to be a Sikh, or Christian, or Jew, I would want to know why I wear a turban, why I wear a crucifix, why I wear a Kippah.

I just believe that it should be the individual's choice to be able to choose their own religion, and that there is a virtual age-limit, similar to one physically imposed on drinking/driving/sex etc., which can be applied to when a person chooses their religion.

2009-11-07 23:45:00

Author:
dawesbr

Posts: 3280

Ranger, for you to think Christianity is a problem in society disgusts me. If we didn't have Christians, we wouldn't have groups that feed the hungry, groups that boycott government injustice, groups that shelter the homeless....

The fact of the matter is, Christianity is one of the single best things that's happened to our world. America wouldn't be America without it. For all we know, we could still have slavery.

Not every atheist is as kind as Comphermc, lol

2009-11-08 00:02:00

Author:
Incinerator22

Posts: 3251

I'm not going to say much, but I'll chip in a little. I was raised Catholic: baptized, confessions, made communion, went to Catholic school, the whole nine yards. I never had a dislike/hatred for the religion - in fact, the schools I went to gave me some of the best intellectual foundation I could have possibly gotten in the area I was in at the time. I don't remember ever disagreeing with what was taught, but maybe that's because I don't remember any of the actual religious teachings. I remember reading to the class in Kindergarten and I remember playing outside in the park they had, but I don't really remember much "God" stuff.

That said, I eventually grew out of religion on my own. I think I believed in God and some form of Christianity until I was in 5th grade or so, about the same time I switched to the public school system. Science made loads of sense to me - my initial reaction was "they can explain that?" - and I loved the idea of discovering why things worked instead of just accepting that they did. I slowly became more agnostic as I learned more about the world as science explains it, but I always still felt offended when people put down the idea of God.

It wasn't until I was in eighth grade that I figured out how I felt: I didn't think the idea of a god was likely, because so far everything I thought "God" was responsible for could actually be explained by science. I still feel the same way. I don't denounce the possibility of some deity existing, but I feel it's highly unlikely that one does, and even more unlikely that any of the world's religions are worshiping the "correct" higher power. I only believe in what I can see evidence of - if it can't be proved to me, then I accept the fact that I don't fully understand that aspect of the universe and I move on. I've never felt the need to explain the things I don't understand - I just accept that it's an unknown and, if necessary, use my current knowledge to deduce what the most likely outcome is.

If what I think needs to be labeled, I guess "rationalist" is the best term to describe my view on the world at large.

And, to those of you getting heated, I am watching this thread. Calm yourselves.

2009-11-08 00:14:00

Author:
ConfusedCartman

Posts: 3729

Ranger, for you to think Christianity is a problem in society disgusts me. If we didn't have Christians, we wouldn't have groups that feed the hungry, groups that boycott government injustice, groups that shelter the homeless....

While christians do contribute to those things it is not exclusive to them, people are perfectly capable of doing those things with no religious involvement.

2009-11-08 00:17:00

Author:
Rabid-Coot

Posts: 6728

Not every atheist is as kind as Comphermc, lol

And not every Christian is as kind as to do the things you mentioned. So many sects are very negative in their outlook (though there are many positive sects that the media ignores), and even some of the more major denominations like Baptist seem to have a fairly negative outlook (I drive past a Baptist church every day on the way into school which has a "quote" board outside with a different Bible quote on. I have never seen one which is not along the lines of "Fear our Lord God for he is Merciful and shall Rain Brimstone upon us". Not what I see as embracing God and Christianity in a loving way. )

2009-11-08 00:20:00

Author:
dawesbr

Posts: 3280

Guys and girls, please, I'm not going to re-affirm what ConfusedCartman said because a) he said it better than I could and b) I've not got the authority to lock a thread, but please keep this discussion going cordially and with respect.

It's a mega topic, it's a very serious topic, and I am so surprised and pleased that we can talk about such things on a forum about a game. Everyone's opinions are important, but as I've said before, the mods/admin aren't here to make any excuse to lock it, but they CAN and they WILL if they think it has turned into something approaching 'unsavoury' to other members.

Say what you want, by all means, but I urge you to think before you type.

2009-11-08 00:28:00

Author:
MrsSpookyBuz

Posts: 1492

It's okay everyone, I made cookies!!

http://imgur.com/vWgIq.jpg

http://imgur.com/z3Go9.jpg

http://imgur.com/1NxkE.jpg

http://imgur.com/TK9rg.jpg

2009-11-08 00:37:00

Author:
Teebonesy

Posts: 1937

I'm an Atheist and proud of it. ( Just read dawesbr's post and agree completely. No religion should be taught at all, it should be for people to choose and find of their own free will )

I find it extremely offensive to have religion of any kind rammed down my throat at every opportunity. I was forced to go to sunday school as a child and to sing hymns there and at normal school which I absolutely despised.

That sort of thing should be banned altogether. Why should young children be preached at by religious freaks trying to brainwash them into their way of thinking ? No-one should have that forced on them as it is now and has been for centuries. That is the biggest human rights crime in history.

The media are as much to blame as anyone, They bombard us with religious bunkum on TV, radio and in the newspapers but at least we have the option to not view, listen or read such offensive material. In school we had no such option and it was forced on us whether we wanted it or not. I believe all people who suffered that as I did as a child should be compensated for the harm done to our minds and psyche. It was like torture having to endure something you had no belief in and the whole practice should be outlawed.

I have nothing but hatred and contempt for people of any religion trying to force their ridiculous beliefs on me. Don't even get me started on Jehovah's witnesses who come knocking on your door time and time again. I wouldn't dream of doing that to make people believe things I believed in. It just shows what ignorant and pathetic creatures they are.

2009-11-08 00:48:00

Author:
mistervista

Posts: 2210

lol!!!RELIGIOUS COOKIES!!!

...after hearing what dawes said...i think i'm atheist-agnostic-rationlism...a mix of all three!

edit - and like i said in previous posts...if there IS a god...he sure isn't happy the way we are going!

2009-11-08 00:48:00

Author:
theswweet

Posts: 2468

Whoa! MrV, why don't you tell us how you really feel...?

Did we get that off of our chest now? I hope we don't use any more words like "freaks" or "brainwash". I agree with you that it is most annoying when others try to force their opinions and beliefs on me, but lets try to cut down on the potentially offensive name calling. I understand that it riles you up (even more so than lag, it seems!), but it's much more pleasant for everyone if we remain calm. Not to single you out, by any means - this goes for anyone who is getting heated.

2009-11-08 01:05:00

Author:
comphermc

Posts: 5338

Sorry but I stand by every word. I've been a victim of religion for too many years. It's high time it was banned altogether. Religion ( of any and all faiths ) is responsible for more deaths than any other thing in the history of mankind. FACT.

Oh and I forgot to mention the fraudsters and conmen that use religion to fleece people. I think you call them 'evangelists'.

2009-11-08 01:12:00

Author:
mistervista

Posts: 2210

Well, you make the point that you hate when others force their beliefs on you, but I ask you to consider how banning all religion is not forcing your beliefs on others... Would it be all that different.

2009-11-08 01:15:00

Author:
comphermc

Posts: 5338

Atheism can even be seen as a "religion" of sorts - a set of doctrines (there is no higher power/science can explain the universe etc.) that control our attitude to the world and our actions in it as well as affecting our spirituality.

2009-11-08 01:17:00

Author:
dawesbr

Posts: 3280

which meens that if you do that you won't be any better than those mean-os that did that to you as a child!

2009-11-08 01:19:00

Author:
theswweet

Posts: 2468

Hey, come on now, be nice.

MrV makes a valid point in some respects - he's obviously had 'religion' forced upon him in his earlier years, and it's had the exact opposite affect on what was intended. While I don't condemn anyone for having beliefs of any kind, please understand that maybe for some folk it was a harrowing experience.

I say this to defend anyone who maybe feels they've had a tough time, from whatever viewpoint, and I say it because I want this thread to continue.

2009-11-08 01:24:00

Author:
MrsSpookyBuz

Posts: 1492

@comphermc: That's totally different because all the while religion exists it's offensive to me and an invasion of my human rights.

If it were treated the same as people believing in ghosts or aliens then that would be fine because people aren't forced against their will to follow those beliefs from an early age by family and schools. Religion on the other hand is totally forced on people and that can never be justified.

2009-11-08 01:25:00

Author:
mistervista

Posts: 2210

I'll give it to you that religion is, while not always "forced upon" a child, often..."prioritised" over other religions to the absolute majority of schoolchildren (the GCSE curriculum for most schools focusses on Christianity and Christianity only, and that is bound to have some effect.

Is Buddhism offensive to you? Have you ever in your life had someone ask you to convert to Buddhism (serious question)? Or Taoism? Confucianism? Or any other mildly obscure religion? How is other peoples' opinions a breach of your human rights? How are other peoples' beliefs on a spiritual theory offensive to you, even when said spiritual theory is entirely benevolent and never publicised or in any other way forced upon you? (NB: All serious questions, not just pseudo-questions to try and stump you. My brother has very similar views to you

)

2009-11-08 01:30:00

Author:
dawesbr

Posts: 3280

Those would be fair questions if it weren't for the fact I live in the UK where I have to kowtow to any and every religion that exists here even though I don't acknowledge any of them.

For instance if I met someone in the street of any one of those religions and said one word to them that they found offensive on religious grounds ( even if it was a perfectly innocent word to me and I had no idea what it meant to them ) they could have me arrested for insulting their religion.

However if they offend me with their preaching and chanting I have no such recourse. Not only that but I actually have to contribute to all their religions through my taxes which are used to build them temples etc.

Why on earth should I have to pay for something I have no interest in and find complete poppycock ??

2009-11-08 01:40:00

Author:
mistervista

Posts: 2210

again...i don't care about religion...we have bigger problems at the moment!

2009-11-08 01:41:00

Author:
theswweet

Posts: 2468

mrv, I live in the UK, but for obvious reasons I don't pay taxes yet. However, taxes themselves go towards huge amounts of government spending, and it is bound to be that some of that money has to go towards things you don't want. The government we elect is not a private government for each and every person, but a public one that should, if democracy works as it should on paper, reflect the law of averages and the power of crowds to bring forward laws etc. that reflect the general public's needs and desires. You, as a voting citizen (or a citizen with the RIGHT to vote, at least) have elected (or neglected to vote for and had elected without your decision, but again, the law of averages wins out) a government whom you have placed your trust in to provide a service for you as a member of the public - to run the country efficiently, to control certain aspects of it and to boost the economy. Doing so requires taxes, a fund from you to contribute towards the service that they provide - however, not all those taxes go to just what you want. Some, of course, will go to government agencies that you DO rely on, but some will go to other locations, such as religions etc. It is how democracy works - the populace as a whole has a say and the whole nation strives towards equality.

I would also say that someone who doesn't use, say, the cheques system, should still be made to pay that section of their taxes (Stamp Duty), just as you are required to pay a section of your taxes towards religions. In the end, taxes are just funds for the government. If your tax report said simply "funding" every year as did everyone else's, it would still go to religions, but you didn't directly pay funds FOR religions, instead, you paid taxes for the government to run the country as you elected them to do.

But that's less about religion.

2009-11-08 02:09:00

Author:
dawesbr

Posts: 3280

Ranger, for you to think Christianity is a problem in society disgusts me. If we didn't have Christians, we wouldn't have groups that feed the hungry, groups that boycott government injustice, groups that shelter the homeless..

This seems a rather naive notion to me, and a rather insulting one at that. Ethnocentrism at it's highest.

Do you really think that it is only Christians that feed the hungry or boycott the government? Do you really believe no one else cares about the homeless?

Even more importantly, even if you did believe that, do you also believe those same people would suddenly stop doing so if they no longer believed in the christian personal god?

Let me phrase it to it this way - if you suddenly learned there was no Christian God, would you care less about the homeless?

If you claim to have any moral integrity, or that these people have any moral integrity, you have to retract the claim that they only do these things because of an ever-watching being.

So which is it, are these people moral (in which case they would do this regardless), or are they shallow suck-ups to an invisible hall monitor?

I have no doubt that many charitable people are attracted to religion, but I hardly think the religion itself makes any difference. They would be equally charitable, I would imagine, were they to worship a fuzzy red bunny.

The fact of the matter is, Christianity is one of the single best things that's happened to our world.

I'd argue against that. Severely.

Honestly though, do you really think that your specific mythology is required for moral behavior? Think of the horrible world that would be left if there were no Christianity, and instead the world fell to someone like Ghandi and his Hindu ilk.

America wouldn't be America without it.

It should probably be pointed out that this is a morally neutral statement, not an inherently positive one. "New Jersey just wouldn't be New Jersey without the smell."

Also, it is an interesting statement for a nation founded by deists.

For all we know, we could still have slavery.

For all we know, the Inquisition might not have happened ... perhaps even a stronger case there.

Should we list atrocities versus vague benefits that "may or may not" have happened regardless?

Atheism can even be seen as a "religion" of sorts - a set of doctrines.

Not following doctrine A is no more a doctrine than "this doughnut wasn't created by a unicorn" is a scientific theory.

It's a dismissal of one doctrine out of an infinite amount of potential ones, assuming you even wish to have one. It doesn't lead to any particular doctrine itself, it's just "not that one".

Karl Marx

Ayn Rand

Obviously these people are not working from "a shared doctrine", they just both happen not be of the particular doctrine of a personal god.

there is no higher power

Not required for atheism.

science can explain the universe etc

Not required for atheism.

2009-11-08 02:41:00

Author:
Jagrevi

Posts: 1154

*sigh* I FINALLY caught up!

I have a few initial thoughts, and will give more intelligent responses tomorrow since it took me so long to read this thread tonight!

First of all, I'm a Christian, and rest assured, I wasn't offended by anything anyone said. This is the main reason why I love this site so much. Most of the regular users are very respectful.

I have so much to say and I don't know where to start. On that note, I'm going to bed and will be back. Please don't make me read another 10 pages when I get back

But if I have to, I will.

@ Jagrevi - I'd be interested to read your argument against Christianity being one of the best things that's happened to this world. Not that I want to start an argument, I'd just like to know your honest thoughts/opinions. Thanks!

2009-11-08 03:27:00

Author:
Powershifter

Posts: 668

yawn...big reads!

2009-11-08 03:32:00

Author:
theswweet

Posts: 2468

yawn...big reads!

Please, how is this contributing positively to the discussion? As stated in the OP, if you don't have anything positive to add, don't feel obligated to jump in. I understand that you want to be involved, and there's no one stopping you, but please actually find something to contribute before you post. Understand that I'm not personally attacking you. The same goes for anyone who decides to post.

@Powershifter - welcome! Looking forward to hearing what you have to say, and where you stand on some of the issues already addressed by the "majority" (in the sense of everyone that has posted thus far). I'm glad you haven't been offended...

2009-11-08 03:55:00

Author:
comphermc

Posts: 5338

If I could add one more point to this thread before I retire, I'd like to put forward the following argument.

Moral behavior is moral behavior whether the universe was created by an omniscient intelligence, by natural process, or by the sneeze of Bhumagelsh.

Regardless of whether there's any gods or not, people still bleed, they still feel pain, and we should have empathy for them regardless. What is right does not hinge on whether or not we are being watched.

Atheism vs. (Supernatural Religion of choice) is not, at its heart, a moral argument. It's a metaphysical argument.

For good or ill, religion likes to take credit for morality - it packages itself with basic morality we all agree with and then whenever anyone argues against it, it uses the common morality as a defense, as if that's what was being attacked.

Gods or no, there will still be moral codes we pass to our children and innate morality.
Gods or no, there will still be community groupings and kinship.
Gods or no, there will still be tradition, and ritual, and a sense of oneness with your fellow man.

Gods or no, there will always be the numinous.

These things are not "God", nor are they "religion", for they easily and vibrantly exist without them.

If there's a moral argument against religion as a whole, more than any specific religion, it stems from this...

It is, in my humble opinion, a very foolish thing to teach people that what is right is only right because of something that may or may not be true.

@ Jagrevi - I'd be interested to read your argument against Christianity being one of the best things that's happened to this world. Not that I want to start an argument, I'd just like to know your honest thoughts/opinions. Thanks!

I'd love to have a conversation with you about this, but at the moment, I need to put my daughter to bed, and then have other rather important things to get to myself. I just noticed your post after I finished typing out what I wrote above.

We will certainly have the chance to talk though if you'd like to.

2009-11-08 04:01:00

Author:
Jagrevi

Posts: 1154

Honestly though, do you really think that your specific mythology is required for moral behavior?

Out of respect for those of us who are believers, I would ask that you choose your words more carefully.

That being said, however... I'd like to say that I was going to post a very similar response to this post myself:

Ranger, for you to think Christianity is a problem in society disgusts me. If we didn't have Christians, we wouldn't have groups that feed the hungry, groups that boycott government injustice, groups that shelter the homeless....

The fact of the matter is, Christianity is one of the single best things that's happened to our world. America wouldn't be America without it. For all we know, we could still have slavery.

Not every atheist is as kind as Comphermc, lol
I'm sad to say that the history of this world is built upon a long series of painful atrocities committed in the name of God(s). And to this very day, charlatans and con men use His name to elicit all manner of spoils from their victims.

And yes, I fully agree that were Christ to have never been homilized and Christianity never become the institution that it now is, that human nature would surely still produce those that love and care, and those that would give generously from their hearts and pockets, just as it would produce slavers, and child molesters, and all other manner of evil that is possible in the human psyche. We Christians do not have the market on kindness, love and charity. But it is attitudes like this from one church after another that has distanced me for so long from organized religions (and the self-righteous pundits with which they are so rife). I have known far too many religious (Christian, Jewish, "just call me spiritual") people who were complete a-holes, and just as many fine, wonderful people who proclaimed themselves agnostic and even atheist (as are so well represented in this thread).

2009-11-08 04:12:00

Author:
v0rtex

Posts: 1878

Not only that but I actually have to contribute to all their religions through my taxes which are used to build them temples etc.

Why on earth should I have to pay for something I have no interest in and find complete poppycock ??

that isnt true is it?

"I would also say that someone who doesn't use, say, the cheques system, should still be made to pay that section of their taxes (Stamp Duty), just as you are required to pay a section of your taxes towards religions. In the end, taxes are just funds for the government. If your tax report said simply "funding" every year as did everyone else's, it would still go to religions, but you didn't directly pay funds FOR religions, instead, you paid taxes for the government to run the country as you elected them to do."

sorry but thats riduculous, thats justification. i dont see how its equality either

2009-11-08 08:32:00

Author:
lifeiscrapislife

Posts: 396

according to yahoo answers & something else, they dont cost taxmoney, mrv you got to get your facts straight

2009-11-08 10:01:00

Author:
lifeiscrapislife

Posts: 396

right i want to put my 2 cents in.

Im an Atheist through and through i was brought up as a christian, Baptism going to a CofE school, etc,

but what i want to put forward, is how much the bible contradicts itself, to quote Ricky Gervais, "He created the heaven and the earth... IN THE DARK!!"
are we meant to believe these contradictions and swallow them down.

2009-11-08 10:18:00

Author:
Kern

Posts: 5078

Here's something to think about Catholic/Christian faith: The normality easily accept abortion, g*y marriage, extremeists, etc., because their mind is set saying, "It'll never happen to me. I won't get into situations like that." In some cases, that is true.
But Catholic/Christian morales look beyond self-perspective. They reject pride and self-dignity to pursue chastity and humility. Sharing and giving is strongly encouraged, and things like greed and lust are strongly cautioned. In this world of imperfections and crises, our faith tries it's best to make it a better place for all. So what if Catholic/Christian ideals aren't the "norm"? So what if science and public-opinion contradict religious affairs? So what if being a Catholic/Christian means that your items may be given away to some stranger? SO WHAT...
At least I have the upmost certainty that, even thought there might NOT be a god waiting for me on the other side, when I leave the world, I leave knowing I did the right thing with my life.

@KernelM: We're meant to learn from them. Besides, most of the Bible is spoken in parable, a form of story-telling. So about half of it is just song and stories to reflect upon.

2009-11-08 10:26:00

Author:
Outlaw-Jack

Posts: 5757

Finally a Religion Topic

)

4 You shall remember and keep the Sabbath day holy.
i tell you a little story about this
6000 before jesus his birth humans where not nice and selfish and they balance of good and evil was not good
but god whant to have nice poeple so he gave all the humans a soul
so they can have a good balance between them but after 6000 years god as that humans stil where yea not nice and whant to take there souls away but his son whant to stop that and whanted to give them a second change so he became a human and learnd the poeple there to life good and to be really nice for eatch other and later he died and poeple learnd to respect eatch other

but yea there where still bad poeple
so the holy day when jezus died is the day when god gave us a second change

(and if you dont understand this thust say it and i wil explain but it wil be hard to explain

)

5 Respect your father and mother.
they keep watch over you and keep you on the good path so give then respect

6 You must not kill.
this make a lot of sence beqasue you harm poeple with it and that is not good
never do this ok

7 You must not commit adultery.
dont have sex before your mariage beqause when you are mariagest you can thrust your love and know when you have a baby your partner dont get away but stays with you
(you can have sex with people if you do it save

)

8 You must not steal.
you can harm poeple with it
and it makes poeple mad

9 You must not give false evidence against your neighbour.
never Lie! NEVER!
are you most lie more and more and then you life is a Lie!

10 You must not be envious of your neighbour's goods. You shall not be envious of his house nor his wife, nor anything that belongs to your neighbour.
dont be jalouse it make you a monster

and the bible is based on these rules and the stories and thust examples of these rules

so im a proud christian and i beleave in the evolution to

2009-11-08 10:28:00

Author:
Unknown User

that isnt true is it?

Yes it is. Just because you choose not to believe the truth and would rather trust in yahoo doesn't make it so.

The UK government gives milllions every year to religious types to indulge their fantasies and provide buildings and sundries for them. They don't just magic that money up from somewhere. It comes directly from my and the rest of the country's taxes.

You show me one tiny shred of evidence to substantiate your belief and I will acknowledge it.

@Jagrevi. Well done sir. You say what I would like to say but you do it much more eloquently. I only wish I had your grasp of the English language and grammar. I am only able to speak in simple terms and from the heart.

@Hybrid-Leader. Why would you believe anything written in the bible. That's a complete work of fiction. You yourself compare it to 'Lord of the Rings'. Does that mean you believe in hobbits and Gandalf too. They aren't real you know !! As for the commandments if they were fact what sort of so called 'benevolent deity' would start off by saying you must only believe in me? That sounds like something Hitler or 'Blofeld' would have said. If you then take the first commandment at face value that in itself means you are immediately breaking commandment 2. Can you not see how hypocritical that is?

2009-11-08 11:11:00

Author:
mistervista

Posts: 2210

Ranger, for you to think Christianity is a problem in society disgusts me. If we didn't have Christians, we wouldn't have groups that feed the hungry, groups that boycott government injustice, groups that shelter the homeless....

The fact of the matter is, Christianity is one of the single best things that's happened to our world. America wouldn't be America without it. For all we know, we could still have slavery.

Erm yeah. Your lack of faith in the human race astounds me.

You think if Christianity didn't exist no one would do anything for anyone? Would i be right in assuming you are Christian? And American had slavery abolished because of Christianity? Do explain.

That post didn't have anything even close to truth in it.... Religion doesn't make people who don't care about things care - If someone wants to donate, or any of the other things you mentioned, they will do it because they believe it right, not because they think it will appease Gods will. If you are only Christian to make yourself feel like you are the only ones who can help people, i don't think you quite got the point

2009-11-08 12:17:00

Author:
Unknown User

Sorry hybrid you say that believe believed in god that didnt exist...

SO DO YOU.

2009-11-08 12:20:00

Author:
CreateNPlay

Posts: 1266

Sorry hybrid you say that believe believed in god that didnt exist...

SO DO YOU.

What in the world are you trying to say here? I can't make sense of it, but it sounds like you are just trying to start an argument... you know exactly what he means, even if his English isn't perfect. I'd appreciate that if you aren't going to offer much to the discussion, and only post to make fun, that you didn't post in my thread at all.

Thank you, and good day.

2009-11-08 12:34:00

Author:
comphermc

Posts: 5338

He said that 2000 years ago people believed in gods that didn't exist.

So does he.

2009-11-08 12:42:00

Author:
CreateNPlay

Posts: 1266

He has a point. (CnP does)

All other religions gods from the past were dismissed readily enough as soon as we have killed everyone who believed in them, and the same will happen when someone kills all Christians or whatever... Suddenly our 'god' will be forgotten about, and i guarantee no one will be struck down by him.

2009-11-08 12:45:00

Author:
Unknown User

In any case the worst thing a religious person can do is disrespect another religion or even go as far as ridiculing it. They harm their own believe, moreover they are likely to disobey the rules set forth in their holy scripture. Most of them include the rule that you should respect other believes!

can you pleas read this

i can give you bad rep for this but im a good person

2009-11-08 12:51:00

Author:
Unknown User

2000 years ago poeple believed in other gods and they where wrong beqause
they where not real ake god of love,god of war stuff

Ok, not the best choice of words on his part, but this is what I assume he meant:

"2000 years ago, people believed in gods that differed from the views of Christianity, such as the god of love (Aphrodite) or the god of war (Ares). The Bible [read: Christianity], wanting to dispel these beliefs, condemned these idols as false."

I see now the point you are trying to make, but let's try to do it in a more respectful way. The text that Hybrid quotes above is exactly right. To read the whole message, see the quoted text in the OP.

@Iron - try to choose your words more sensitively, please. That is a very candid, simplified view.

2009-11-08 12:52:00

Author:
comphermc

Posts: 5338

Ok, not the best choice of words on his part, but this is what I assume he meant:

"2000 years ago, people believed in gods that differed from the views of Christianity, such as the god of love (Aphrodite) or the god of war (Ares). The Bible [read: Christianity], wanting to dispel these beliefs, condemned these idols as false."

I see now the point you are trying to make, but let's try to do it in a more respectful way. The text that Hybrid quotes above is exactly right. To read the whole message, see the quoted text in the OP.

@Iron - try to choose your words more sensitively, please. That is a very candid, simplified view.

thank you Alot

im not english so i known only the basis of the english

2000 years ago poeple believed in other gods and they where wrong beqause
they where not real ake god of love,god of war stuff
it was hard to say you know

2009-11-08 12:57:00

Author:
Unknown User

2009-11-08 13:03:00

Author:
CreateNPlay

Posts: 1266

I'm not religious so why should i care if i bash it.

Well, if this is your belief, then leave my thread. This is a debate thread, not an argument thread. If you don't care to hear others' opinions, then I don't care to hear yours.

Thank you.

2009-11-08 13:07:00

Author:
comphermc

Posts: 5338

I'm not religious so why should i care if i bash it.

http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/picard-facepalm.jpg

In any case the worst thing a person can do is disrespect another religion or even go as far as ridiculing it. They harm their own believe, moreover they are likely to disobey the rules set forth in their holy scripture. Most of them include the rule that you should respect other believes!

read it again
and
pleas go away

2009-11-08 13:07:00

Author:
Unknown User

2009-11-08 13:12:00

Author:
ARD

Posts: 4291

This, and ever so much of it.

/leaves

i agree that poeple most chose for them self

and not some one else for them

2009-11-08 13:21:00

Author:
Unknown User

When will people see they believe in a fantasy story that has no truth in it.. /leaves

2009-11-08 13:26:00

Author:
CreateNPlay

Posts: 1266

Jeezem Crow, folks, don't make me get the cookies out again.

As for the argument about what good has come out of organized religion, we all
have (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades)
the (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judaism_and_slavery)
massive (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rwanda_massacre)
tomes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_history_of_American_indigenous_peoples)
of (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salem_witch_trials)
history (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Jerusalem_%281099%29#Massacre)
available (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_inquisition)
to (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11)
us (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology).

Anyone who wishes to make fun of my linking to wikipedia whilst referring to "massive tomes of history", I leave the door wide open for you.

It's far too late for me to get into this too much more for now - but I am having a good time keeping up with this thread.

2009-11-08 13:44:00

Author:
Teebonesy

Posts: 1937

When will people see they believe in a fantasy story that has no truth in it.. /leaves

wow that is really cold

sorry that i say it but you need to use your brains to understand it
you most Think about the things where you are trolling about!
its like saying games are bad when you never played a game

and if you dont whant to do it then dont say anything about it

2009-11-08 13:52:00

Author:
Unknown User

wow that is really cold

sorry that i say it but you need to use your brains to understand it
you most Think about the things where you are trolling about!
its like saying games are bad when you never played a game

and if you dont whant to do it then dont say anything about it

That is a very good analogy...

(Is atheist)

2009-11-08 14:06:00

Author:
Boomy

Posts: 3701

2009-11-08 14:29:00

Author:
Gilgamesh

Posts: 2536

@Teebonesy : It's very easy to pick up only the negatives of something and say that it's bad. I would argue that, like all human endeavours (except maybe the Atom Bomb), there is some good and some bad.

It's intellectual dishonesty to only accept the "good" part of something and ignore the "bad". But the opposite is also true.

Does religion deserve to disappear or be persecuted because it brought some bad to the world as well as some good? A bit of study will reveal that scientific progress has also brought some bad to the world as well as some good. The definition of "good" and "bad" is also very subjective.

I would not argue that scientific progress should be halted though, and by the same criteria I don't believe religion should disappear either. If I attempted to impose my belief upon others, I would be no better than a tyrant, even if I think I'm "right" or "making the world better" in doing so.

I'm being careful to be quite specific about "organized" religion and not religion in general.

"Religion" as a concept, as a general term, has been wonderfully defined by Gandhi, and I'll post some of his quotes here.

"By religion, I do not mean formal religion, or customary religion, but that religion which underlies all religions, which brings us face to face with our Maker."

"Faith is a kind of sixth sense, which works in cases, which are without the purview of Reason."

"In reality there are as many religions as there are individuals."

"Let me explain what I mean by religion. It is not the Hindu religion which I certainly prize above all other religions, but the religion which transcends Hinduism, which changes one's very nature, which binds one indissolubly to the truth within and which ever purifies. It is the permanent element in human nature which counts no cost too great in order to find full expression and which leaves the soul utterly restless until it has found itself, known its Maker and appreciated the true correspondence between the Maker and itself."

Gandhi paints a picture of true religion as being fiercely personal, emotional, spiritual, unique, yet at the same time something that a great diversity of people share fundamentally in some way, no matter which church or temple they may or may not attend. I agree with this - particularly the statement that there are as many religions as there are individuals. Organized religion obscures this fact, often from the individuals themselves.

But organized religion throughout history? I cannot possibly attempt to weigh those good things they've brought against the negative. The balance in my learning is so grossly askew that it paints a pretty grim portrait of what ORGANIZED religion has done for the world. It may seem like I'm cherry-picking the bad, but I only wish it was "bad". In fact many of the greatest horrors ever committed by mankind have been the result of organized religion, the politics and extremity of it. It is doubtful I will ever be convinced that the good balance it out in even the remotest sense.

Religion in PERSONAL terms, on the other hand, through Gandhi's definition, is another story.

2009-11-08 14:43:00

Author:
Teebonesy

Posts: 1937

Looks like the spiraling has begun. If you're going to post here, make sure your post is on topic and presented in a respective manner. I'm quite close to just locking it and being done with it due to - ironically enough - the closed-mindedness of a few folks.

In short, if you'd like to discuss and/or debate, feel free to post. If you'd like to argue and put other beliefs down in order to make your argument, take it somewhere else. Violation of these parameters may result in a personal infraction.

For the time being, I'm leaving this open because the majority of you are going about this the right way.

2009-11-08 14:59:00

Author:
supersickie

Posts: 1366

Good points on both sides, Gilg and Teeb. It seems though, that we are at an impasse, as we are never going to agree on how to quantify good and bad. As I'm sure you both agree, the words good and bad are subjective, so there is nothing we can do but offer anecdotal support one way or the other. In this way, the discussion could go back and forth all day (which I hope it does!).

I don't necessarily agree with the following, but consider this: death and destruction to the human race is essential! Without disease, death, and things of this sort, what would control the population from spiraling to staggering numbers, on an Earth which it seems is struggling to support us even now? This is purely a rational question, so it is mostly directed at Teeb.

NB: I have no motives besides the desire to stir more debate.

2009-11-08 15:05:00

Author:
comphermc

Posts: 5338

@Teebonesy : That's very true. It's important to make the distinction between organized religion and religious belief.

For instance many fundamentalist groups are, IMO, not religious at all because they often go against or ignore the very religion they are claiming to uphold when it suits them.

I'm unsure if religious belief can dissociate itself fully from organized religion though. Would Christianity continue to exist for long if the Church disappeared? Or would the Church simply be replaced by an analogous new religious body?

At the very least, I think that organized religion offers a good logistics support for their members. I don't think the religious texts would have survived the test of time without organized religion.

2009-11-08 15:11:00

Author:
Gilgamesh

Posts: 2536

?Everything is possible for him who believes.?
-Mark 9:23

True, that's what worries me.

I'm sure his neighbor may wish that not everything were possible for him, and that some things he could be persuaded out of by rational argument.

At least I have the upmost certainty

That's the point!

Certainty is NOT a good thing. It is the certain man who does not bother to challenge his ideas, to question his ethical code, to make any kind of moral progress.

It is the certain man, who knows he's right, who is able to pull the trigger on his fellow man.

We're meant to learn from them. Besides, most of the Bible is spoken in parable, a form of story-telling. So about half of it is just song and stories to reflect upon.

If you're willing to admit much of it isn't actually true, and should be reflected upon in the same way that the Illiad and other elements of Greek mythology should be reflected upon, why not go the extra distance and say that none of it should be thought of as actually, scientifically true, and that it should all be taken as parable?

Are the parts that are to be taken as parable highlighted with a marker, or are they simply the parts that you can no longer defend as literally true?

I leave knowing I did the right thing with my life.

I'd like to point out that you previously emphasized that it gives you certainty, you didn't make any argument in the post to argue that the certainty is in anyway justified.

What is actually more important to you, getting your morality "right or wrong", or simply "knowing" that your morality is right or wrong?

So what if science and public-opinion contradict religious affairs?

If a moral argument actually hinges on whether or not something is true, than the reality of the situation does make a difference.

If someone makes a compelling argument that reality is not what you've claimed, you cannot both at the same time dismiss it as irrelevant and make any kind of moral argument from an alternative.

The "so what" argument has no integrity, and I would hope that you would ultimately know it.

"We can't eat that sandwhich, bread has a mind of it's own, and a soul. Just eat this lamb instead."

"Look, I can prove the lamb can feel more pain than the bread".

"So what?"

The example was rather silly, but compare it to stem cells and fly brains if you will. Flies have much more brain capacity, feel many, many fold more pain than does a stem cell ... and yet there are people who oppose stem cell research to aid the suffering, while at the same time swatting flies.

Why? Because they argue their way is more moral because of a belief in "souls".

As long as people base any moral action on these things, it does matter. If you take such an action based on the belief in a "soul" it does matter whether or not it's true.

Do not expect to say "so what" and be taken seriously at all, or to be given anything but contempt by those people who suffer because of the decision, none-the-less their loved ones.

The second you take any kind of action, for example, with "soul" as your justification, the reality or non-reality of them became instantly relevant.

Finally a Religion Topic

im my self a Christian
my parents raise my with the Christian style and learnd my with the ways of the bible
but when i was 12 i thought about the Christianity and then i came to the conclusion that i did not made any sense so i became atheist but later when in was 13 and 6 months then i thought more about it and i got in the begin of the year Religion lessons and the teacher learnd my how to understand Religion by letting us see movies like the lord of the rings and some other movies beqause some movies got a meaning! like all the stories of the bible
and thats when i thought alot about the Christianity and find out things that did make sence
the bible let us see how to life good with eatch other with the 10 rules of life
in the bible its called the 10 commandments

Nowhere in here, mind you, do you actually argue the likely-hood that there's an actual God, you simply say that the bible is a parable worth reading and assessed morally.

The Illiad is also something I recommend children read as parable, and reflect upon morally. I would not teach it to them as "true" however.

You have made no argument to elevate the bible above the Illiad, no less the Koran, the Torah, and so forth.

The argument that there is no Jehova is not an argument that the Bible is not culturally relevant, in the same way that the argument that there is no Poseidon is not an argument that Homer's Odyssey is not culturally relevant.

Both really should be read, but I've yet to hear any good argument as to why one should be picked out more specifically than the other.

Does religion deserve to disappear or be persecuted because it brought some bad to the world as well as some good?

Just out of question - what good has it brought into the world that depended upon it?

Again note, we're talking about the idea of a supernatural belief, not the concept of a traditional moral code, kinship group, etc., etc.

We can list atrocities up to the ceiling, but what good has religion brought that would not have been there in a godless world?

I think it boils down to this - What moral act can a religious person do that that same person could not do were they to believe in a different origin for the universe?

They reject pride and self-dignity to pursue chastity and humility.

"The universe was set up specifically with us in mind, the creator of the universe is on my side and cares about me, the creator of the universe came and talked to people, and has given me privileged knowledge."

I do not believe humility is ultimately to be found here, despite how much they may like to revel in the word itself.

A man who preaches humility over a megaphone or with a giant sign on the street corner is not a man who preaches humility.

Sharing and giving is strongly encouraged

Not a "Christian" idea. Not even a "Religious" idea. Simply an idea that religions, and Christians (except for Calvanists, of course) sign up for, that most all societies agree on.

Do you not think people in Ancient Greece strongly encouraged their children to share and make nice?

@Jagrevi. Well done sir. You say what I would like to say but you do it much more eloquently. I only wish I had your grasp of the English language and grammar. I am only able to speak in simple terms and from the heart.

I do my best.

What most people don't get about the church is that it's not just stories. In fact, it's WAAAYY more than just that.

This is kind of changing the argument, is it not?

Alot of people seem to be doing that. The atheist position is not a position of no shared morality, no cultural tradition, and so forth.

Why, they just presume that 4.6 billion years ago, the same time the universe was supposibly born, Earth was born as well.

I'd like to point out that this is easily disprovable.

The universe is far more than 4.6 billion years old, and that is very easy to demonstrate. That's the approximate age of the earth, not the universe.

If think I will return to this thread later and write up a small post on the relative ages of the earth and the universe, and how we know them both.

It's not only the raw text that people usually mistranslate, but also our ideals. It's not our conquest in the world to make EVERYONE a Catholic/Christian. I mean, that'd be nice...

So it's only not your goal because you consider it "unrealistic".

Brotherly love? Of course. Brotherly love in the "other" sense... not exactly. Many say that our set concious on gays & lesbians is that we must NEVER be near them and that they're hated by God. NO WAY in any sense is that true! I mean, being a ***/lesbian might be frowned upon in the faith, but that doesn't mean that you're not welcomed into it.

Obviously, the figures for *** priests in the catholic church is far more than the ratio of homosexuals in the population at large.

They're welcome, but they are somewhat lesser, no? "More naturally inclined towards a sinful act"?

Simple question - is the romantic love between two women equal to that of the love of a man and a woman?
Do their hearts sing falsely?

Our choice to make our own decisions was God's intention, not his mistake. I mean, God had a choice to either condemn us to Hell for the rest of eternity, or to save us from that fate. He chose the latter of the two, knowing better.

Well yay for God for not deciding to condemn us to torture us for eternity. What a beacon of morality, I only hope I can live up to the same standard for my daughter.

He chose to give us a second chance, to express his love & grace to us, his chosen people.

His "chosen people".

Are we back to God being a racist and having "favorite races of people"? Heaven knows he certainly doesn't like the Chinese as much, he apparently doesn't even bother to send them a messenger the way he did for the ancient Hebrews.

EDIT: Oh yes, and a "second chance". I forgot how infants are to be held mortally liable for sins committed by their ancestors which they had no say in.

Never judge a book by it's cover; you'll never know what it's about until you open it and see it yourself.

This I completely agree with.

I want to be clarify, again, that I'm not arguing people should not read the bible.

2009-11-08 15:48:00

Author:
Jagrevi

Posts: 1154

Boy. I finally have reached the end. lol!

Personally, I ask myself, why does the question matter? Why do I have to be pulled in either direction or caught in the middle in a debate where it seems all sides are "framed."

When I was in middle school I thought of myself as an atheist, because that was the best way I knew how to describe my beliefs.

But as I got older, I knew that wasn't it. Why does my existence have to be demarcated by an idea of a deity?

A. either I believe in a diety
B. I don't believe in a diety
C. I don't know what to believe about a diety/dieties

Why do I have to choose one?

I guess I would describe it as being ignostic. (yes, with an "i" lol! :-P)

Don't get me wrong. Like anyone else I'm curious about where we come from and if anything we do has purpose.

But having to read some of the contempt coming from both sides in this topic just makes me more sure that I'm not going to choose any of the choices posited above.

As far as familial history, I was raised southern Baptist. My parents, especially my father, is religious and as a child I respected that. When I became an adult was able to just realize that my father for his reasons wanted a belief in religion.

I see no problem in that. I see no problem in the opposite either.

It just seems because there are no real answers. Comments in topics like these become more like confessions of how we all have dealt with religion in our lives. I don't mean that adversely either. Oftentimes, especially with topics like religion, we all need a catharsis.... speaking about it with other people is one of those ways.

I know it's difficult to talk about religion generally, but this topic allows people to share their perspective.

Some comments goading others to respond negatively and others being sincerely amenable to others beliefs.

I don't know... but these are my thoughts on this subject.

Sorry for any typos...I was typing this as I was thinking it.

2009-11-08 16:03:00

Author:
pantspantspants

Posts: 189

I've just caught up with this thread, too. Somewhat ironic that it's Sunday afternoon.

The more I read, the more I realise that I don't have many answers, and the more I realise that I don't NEED to know.

I was talking to a 'believer' friend of mine recently, who told me she didn't care whether I believed or not, as in her mind God would look after everyone. Nice, comforting thought for her, but I won't hold my breath.

It's worth repeating, though, that many people do find comfort in their faith, and they shouldn't be condemned for it.

But if I am a lost soul who finds herself stood at the gate of St Peter, who asks me why I didn't have faith, I shall simply shrug and say "I did try to look for signs, but I didn't see any."

2009-11-08 16:20:00

Author:
MrsSpookyBuz

Posts: 1492

I wish my laptop wasn't broken, this is certainly something I'd like to get actively involved in. Religious threads generally get out of hand at one point or another but this one seems to have held up so far.

Ranger, for you to think Christianity is a problem in society disgusts me. If we didn't have Christians, we wouldn't have groups that feed the hungry, groups that boycott government injustice, groups that shelter the homeless....

The fact of the matter is, Christianity is one of the single best things that's happened to our world. America wouldn't be America without it. For all we know, we could still have slavery.

I can think of one person straight off that crushes this belief, Bill Gates. I'm sure you've heard of him, that multi-billionaire. His foundation has donated at least 10 billion dollars in the last 10 years. He has fed the hungry (http://www.gatesfoundation.org/topics/Pages/nutrition.aspx#), fought injustice (http://www.worldvision.org/content.nsf/about/20080509-myanmar-cyclone?open&lid=myanmar-release_2&lpos=day_txt_05092008) and sheltered the homeless (http://www.gatesfoundation.org/topics/Pages/housing-homelessness.aspx). All of which, according to you, could only be achieved through Christianity, yet Bill Gates is an atheist.

There's no way I can say for sure that god doesn't exist, just like there's no way I can say for sure that one does. However, I am an atheist to the extent one can be.

I grew up in a Catholic family and the turning point for me was when I looked at other religions and asked myself why Christianity was correct and all others false. Was it because Christianity had more evidence than the others? Was it because the ideas of the others were wrong? Or was it simply because the region I grew up in was predominantly Catholic? I chose the latter. I ask all deists to look at another religion and question why they don't believe in it, then they'll understand why I don't believe in theirs.

I'll expand on this a bit more later.

2009-11-08 16:27:00

Author:
Killian

Posts: 2575

I wish my laptop wasn't broken, this is certainly something I'd like to get actively involved in. Religious threads generally get out of hand at one point or another but this one seems to have held up so far.

I can think of one person straight off that crushes this belief, Bill Gates. I'm sure you've heard of him, that multi-billionaire. His foundation has donated at least 10 billion dollars in the last 10 years. He has fed the hungry (http://www.gatesfoundation.org/topics/Pages/nutrition.aspx#), fought injustice (http://www.worldvision.org/content.nsf/about/20080509-myanmar-cyclone?open&lid=myanmar-release_2&lpos=day_txt_05092008) and sheltered the homeless (http://www.gatesfoundation.org/topics/Pages/housing-homelessness.aspx). All of which, according to you, could only be achieved through Christianity, yet Bill Gates is an atheist.

I believe the word is 'owned'?

Microsoft ftw.

2009-11-08 16:29:00

Author:
Unknown User

lol...and yeah that pretty much sums it up!yet another thing is...

we have bigger problems than religion at the moment!

2009-11-08 16:32:00

Author:
theswweet

Posts: 2468

-- How can you have an all-knowing creator and freedom of choice at the same time?

Thought I'd ask

2009-11-08 16:37:00

Author:
KoRnDawwg

Posts: 1424

lol...and yeah that pretty much sums it up!yet another thing is...

we have bigger problems than religion at the moment!

again...i don't care about religion...we have bigger problems at the moment!

Uuuh..
------------------------------------------------------

I believe the word is 'owned'?

Microsoft ftw.

Indeed.
-------------------------------------------------------

I have to say, this thread is an incredibly good work out for my brain

it is very interesting.

2009-11-08 16:38:00

Author:
Boomy

Posts: 3701

lol...and yeah that pretty much sums it up!yet another thing is...

we have bigger problems than religion at the moment!

Are you claiming there's no religious element to debates on Global Warming and so forth?

I can tell you that such debates are very much steeped in religious interpretation, particularly in America. There is even a famous you-tube clip of a government representative claiming that we do not need to worry about global warming, because "man shall not decide when to put an end to this earth, only God shall".

However, if what you are trying to put forth is that there is no reason to heed any ancient religious doctrine in the relevant modern world, and that reason and logic should be implied instead ... welcome to the team.

2009-11-08 16:40:00

Author:
Jagrevi

Posts: 1154

True, that's what worries me.

I'm sure his neighbor may wish that not everything were possible for him, and that some things he could be persuaded out of by rational argument.

That's the point!

Certainty is NOT a good thing. It is the certain man who does not bother to challenge his ideas, to question his ethical code, to make any kind of moral progress.

It is the certain man, who knows he's right, who is able to pull the trigger on his fellow man.

If you're willing to admit much of it isn't actually true, and should be reflected upon in the same way that the Illiad and other elements of Greek mythology should be reflected upon, why not go the extra distance and say that none of it should be thought of as actually, scientifically true, and that it should all be taken as parable?

Are the parts that are to be taken as parable highlighted with a marker, or are they simply the parts that you can no longer defend as literally true?

I'd like to point out that you previously emphasized that it gives you certainty, you didn't make any argument in the post to argue that the certainty is in anyway justified.

What is actually more important to you, getting your morality "right or wrong", or simply "knowing" that your morality is right or wrong?

If a moral argument actually hinges on whether or not something is true, than the reality of the situation does make a difference.

If someone makes a compelling argument that reality is not what you've claimed, you cannot both at the same time dismiss it as irrelevant and make any kind of moral argument from an alternative.

The "so what" argument has no integrity, and I would hope that you would ultimately know it.

"We can't eat that sandwhich, bread has a mind of it's own, and a soul. Just eat this lamb instead."

"Look, I can prove the lamb can feel more pain than the bread".

"So what?"

The example was rather silly, but compare it to stem cells and fly brains if you will. Flies have much more brain capacity, feel many, many fold more pain than does a stem cell ... and yet there are people who oppose stem cell research to aid the suffering, while at the same time swatting flies.

Why? Because they argue their way is more moral because of a belief in "souls".

As long as people base any moral action on these things, it does matter. If you take such an action based on the belief in a "soul" it does matter whether or not it's true.

Do not expect to say "so what" and be taken seriously at all, or to be given anything but contempt by those people who suffer because of the decision, none-the-less their loved ones.

The second you take any kind of action, for example, with "soul" as your justification, the reality or non-reality of them became instantly relevant.

Nowhere in here, mind you, do you actually argue the likely-hood that there's an actual God, you simply say that the bible is a parable worth reading and assessed morally.

The Illiad is also something I recommend children read as parable, and reflect upon morally. I would not teach it to them as "true" however.

You have made no argument to elevate the bible above the Illiad, no less the Koran, the Torah, and so forth.

The argument that there is no Jehova is not an argument that the Bible is not culturally relevant, in the same way that the argument that there is no Poseidon is not an argument that Homer's Odyssey is not culturally relevant.

Both really should be read, but I've yet to hear any good argument as to why one should be picked out more specifically than the other.

Just out of question - what good has it brought into the world that depended upon it?

Again note, we're talking about the idea of a supernatural belief, not the concept of a traditional moral code, kinship group, etc., etc.

We can list atrocities up to the ceiling, but what good has religion brought that would not have been there in a godless world?

I think it boils down to this - What moral act can a religious person do that that same person could not do were they to believe in a different origin for the universe?

"The universe was set up specifically with us in mind, the creator of the universe is on my side and cares about me, the creator of the universe came and talked to people, and has given me privileged knowledge."

I do not believe humility is ultimately to be found here, despite how much they may like to revel in the word itself.

A man who preaches humility over a megaphone or with a giant sign on the street corner is not a man who preaches humility.

Not a "Christian" idea. Not even a "Religious" idea. Simply an idea that religions, and Christians (except for Calvanists, of course) sign up for, that most all societies agree on.

Do you not think people in Ancient Greece strongly encouraged their children to share and make nice?

I do my best.

This is kind of changing the argument, is it not?

Alot of people seem to be doing that. The atheist position is not a position of no shared morality, no cultural tradition, and so forth.

I'd like to point out that this is easily disprovable.

The universe is far more than 4.6 billion years old, and that is very easy to demonstrate. That's the approximate age of the earth, not the universe.

If think I will return to this thread later and write up a small post on the relative ages of the earth and the universe, and how we know them both.

So it's only not your goal because you consider it "unrealistic".

Obviously, the figures for *** priests in the catholic church is far more than the ratio of homosexuals in the population at large.

They're welcome, but they are somewhat lesser, no? "More naturally inclined towards a sinful act"?

Simple question - is the romantic love between two women equal to that of the love of a man and a woman?
Do their hearts sing falsely?

Well yay for God for not deciding to condemn us to torture us for eternity. What a beacon of morality, I only hope I can live up to the same standard for my daughter.

His "chosen people".

Are we back to God being a racist and having "favorite races of people"? Heaven knows he certainly doesn't like the Chinese as much, he apparently doesn't even bother to send them a messenger the way he did for the ancient Hebrews.

EDIT: Oh yes, and a "second chance". I forgot how infants are to be held mortally liable for sins committed by their ancestors which they had no say in.

This I completely agree with.

I want to be clarify, again, that I'm not arguing people should not read the bible.

can you say it agian then i what simpel words
i realy dont know what stands there

2009-11-08 16:41:00

Author:
Unknown User

Certainty is NOT a good thing. It is the certain man who does not bother to challenge his ideas, to question his ethical code, to make any kind of moral progress.

It is the certain man, who knows he's right, who is able to pull the trigger on his fellow man.

"True knowledge exists in knowing that you know nothing" ~Socrates

I figured that this was fairly relevant, and is a proverb that I follow strongly. Only by challenging your own views and accepted knowledge can you ever expand on the truth.

What is actually more important to you, getting your morality "right or wrong", or simply "knowing" that your morality is right or wrong?

In my mind, the actions I make based on morality are one of the few "certains," mainly because it is not that I know what I believe is right. It is that I believe that what I believe is right - my morals are my decision, they are a doctrine created by me that I set as my moral beliefs. In almost every other aspect, I challenge what I assume to be true, but in my conscience I am certain.

...there is no reason to heed any ancient religious doctrine in the relevant modern world, and that reason and logic should be implied instead...

Yes, yes, a thousand times, yes. MORAL doctrine should be employed, without a doubt, but specific religions and their teachings should never be - only the principles behind them. We can argue to save those who have had their lives destroyed by other people by saying that we should help our fellow man - but we should never say "Jesus taught that The Good Samaritan was an example to all Christians about how we should always help our fellow man [ie, that helping our fellow man grants us a seat in heaven]".

2009-11-08 16:43:00

Author:
dawesbr

Posts: 3280

Are you claiming there's no religious element to debates on Global Warming and so forth?

I can tell you that such debates are very much steeped in religious interpretation, particularly in America. There is even a famous you-tube clip of a government representative claiming that we do not need to worry about global warming, because "man shall not decide when to put an end to this earth, only God shall".

However, if what you are trying to put forth is that there is no reason to heed any ancient religious doctrine in the relevant modern world, and that reason and logic should be implied instead ... welcome to the team.

thats pretty much it!all we know is something created the universe...and thats all we should really know!

by the way...the three worst inventions of all time!

1.war!

2.religion!(in general)

3.slavery!

2009-11-08 16:44:00

Author:
theswweet

Posts: 2468

To whoever said that someone said 'this world shall end when god decideds' or whatever it was, that's ********. This world will end when America or some other super power nukes the **** out of it, or when some natural disaster kills us all. If god does exist, he stopped caring a long time ago.

2009-11-08 16:46:00

Author:
Unknown User

can you say it agian then i what simpel words
i realy dont know what stands there

You wish me to put forth an argument for the origin and nature of cosmos and it's moral implications in modern society in simple words?

Just to clarify, and I don't say this to antagonize you in any way, but you're the one of us claiming knowledge as to the ultimate cause of the universe, correct?

Is there anything specifically that you feel I needed to clarify?

2009-11-08 16:49:00

Author:
Jagrevi

Posts: 1154

2009-11-08 16:49:00

Author:
theswweet

Posts: 2468

and if there is a god...he stopped caring because of all the stupid stuff man-kind has done!

exactly.....

2009-11-08 16:53:00

Author:
Unknown User

...and speaking of stupid...the mayan calender ended on february,24,2000...

so no doomsday theory!

2009-11-08 16:58:00

Author:
theswweet

Posts: 2468

This world will end when America or some other super power nukes the **** out of itWhen that wave of nukes fall, incinerate, mutate and eventually destroy all life on Earth, I am sooo gonna laugh

2009-11-08 17:00:00

Author:
KoRnDawwg

Posts: 1424

...and speaking of stupid...the mayan calender ended on february,24,2000...

so no doomsday theory!

2012 actually and that is before you consider that according to newer calculations it actually ends in 2200. In any case the whole "The world ends now"-talk was made up by some New Age people in the 70s or so.

2009-11-08 17:02:00

Author:
Syroc

Posts: 3193

good point!

2009-11-08 17:03:00

Author:
theswweet

Posts: 2468

When that wave of nukes fall, incinerate, mutate and eventually destroy all life on Earth, I am sooo gonna laugh

Apart from the fact you won't be there to laugh.

I find it a bit ironic that we are worried about "destroying the Earth" when it is my firm belief that the Earth will continue to exist if we manage to wipe ourselves out. There will surely be microscopic organisms in the deep reaches of the ocean which will survive nuclear holocaust and resume the cycle of life in our stead.

In the words of the late George Carlin : "The Earth isn't going anywhere. We are!".

Just out of question - what good has it brought into the world that depended upon it?

Again note, we're talking about the idea of a supernatural belief, not the concept of a traditional moral code, kinship group, etc., etc.

We can list atrocities up to the ceiling, but what good has religion brought that would not have been there in a godless world?

I think it boils down to this - What moral act can a religious person do that that same person could not do were they to believe in a different origin for the universe?As I haven't ever liked the study of history, I can't name historical examples offhand. So ignoring the aspects of morality and kinship, and speaking only of my experience as a former Christian, I would say that faith can offer psychological benefit when someone is suffering from hardship, which helps them to cope where they might have instead sunk into depression. Prayer can help to bring peace of mind, and to avoid feelings of despair and helplessness when faced with events beyond our control.

2009-11-08 17:41:00

Author:
Gilgamesh

Posts: 2536

Apart from the fact you won't be there to laugh.

Th---t--that was the joke...

...Anyway, I agree with you on George Carlin - It's not the Earth that's screwed - it's us!

...Back on-topic...Sorry...

2009-11-08 17:45:00

Author:
KoRnDawwg

Posts: 1424

Re: Gilgamesh

Are those the exclusive territory of the supernatural though? Is it necessary for such comforts?

What we're searching for is anything that belief in a "God" provides to the world that it doesn't already have or isn't otherwise able to get, and that is positive.

If comfort in the face of death does not depend on religion, I think this goes along a similar line as to the basic morality that a religion typically underlines, in so far that it would be there regardless. I, personally, am immensely comforted by my world view, and it does not contain any supernatural beings or continued consciousness post-mortem.

So once again, I don't believe this is a defense of religion any more than "it is full of vitamins" is a defense of poisoned celery - it is by no means a unique virtue.

Comfort in the face of death is not under attack here, the idea of a personal, supernatural God is, and once again, I think it's a mistake to conflate the idea with everything it packages itself with.

2009-11-08 18:04:00

Author:
Jagrevi

Posts: 1154

I was born and raised as a Catholic but honestly, I'm Agnostic. Nobody knows though... Shh!

2009-11-08 18:19:00

Author:
iGotFancyPants

Posts: 1355

Thanks Jagrevi for that gem! I'm going to work that into everyday life as much as I can.

...that's like providing the argument of "it's full of vitamins" when discussing poisoned celery!

Too funny. Did you make that up on the spot?

2009-11-08 18:21:00

Author:
comphermc

Posts: 5338

Sorry jagrevi, this one's entirely aimed at you. Nothing personal and I'm sure you'll handle it rather well

I think it boils down to this - What moral act can a religious person do that that same person could not do were they to believe in a different origin for the universe?

None, but let me flip this around at you. Replace the word moral with immoral and see what answer you get.

Even if you go and look at specifics incidents where religion has "caused" attrocities, 9 times out of 10* the underlying motivation was not religious or spiritual. In these cases, religion is normally used as convenient tool for the manipulation of others to achieve some other goal.

*guestimation alert.

So ignoring the aspects of morality and kinship, and speaking only of my experience as a former Christian, I would say that faith can offer psychological benefit when someone is suffering from hardship, which helps them to cope where they might have instead sunk into depression. Prayer can help to bring peace of mind, and to avoid feelings of despair and helplessness when faced with events beyond our control.

Are those the exclusive territory of the supernatural though? Is it necessary for such comforts?

Again, you are perfectly right, these things do not require religion. But just because people like you and I manage to find comfort without religion doesn't undermine the fact that other people do. Finding that comfort is a very personal thing and for some people that means religion. Just because there are several means to the same end doesn't mean that only one is the "right" way and that all others are worthless.

That millions of people around the world do find comfort and derive sound moral codes from their religion is a good thing in my book. They could do it without, but does that mean that they should? I don't think so.

And historically, religion will have played an even greater positive role. Why is it that so many religions sprung up independently around the world (I know many are derived from others, but there are still a LOT of origins), with similar themes? Why do you think there are so many religions that all share common aspects of our origins, life after death, morality and law. I can only think of two reasons: 1. They were all actually influenced by a genuine deity, or 2. People genuinely did need religion to achieve those comforts back then.

If we run with #2, I think we can justify that religion has done a lot of good in shaping cultural development of the human race over the years.

2009-11-08 18:59:00

Author:
rtm223

Posts: 6497

Jagrevi, there are two positive things I can think of that religion brings us. #1 is this discussion. #2 is religious jokes.

2009-11-08 19:32:00

Author:
dawesbr

Posts: 3280

2009-11-08 19:33:00

Author:
Unknown User

What we're searching for is anything that belief in a "God" provides to the world that it doesn't already have or isn't otherwise able to get, and that is positive.No Jagrevi... this is what you are searching for. Please try to avoid imposing your agenda upon our discussion.

Comfort in the face of death is not under attack here, the idea of a personal, supernatural God is, and once again, I think it's a mistake to conflate the idea with everything it packages itself with.
Why must anything be under attack here? This is not meant to be a pulpit for the non-believers, but an open discussion for all of us.

@Hybrid-Leader. Why would you believe anything written in the bible. That's a complete work of fiction.
Please refrain from stating your opinions as fact. The truth is, a great share of events that occur in the Bible have been historically verified from multiple sources. That you choose not to believe the remainder (which is the entire basis of this thread - what we do or do not believe) does not render it false. I'm sorry... but believing that it does is sheer arrogance.

2009-11-08 19:40:00

Author:
v0rtex

Posts: 1878

i stil dont get it what you said
can you pleas say in what simpel words what you whant to say please

What he is saying is that what he wants to say is too complicated to be put in "simple words". For example, he used the word "metaphysical" a few times. To put that in simple words would be something along the lines of "something which is about everything that can't be explained by basic rules that are already established and is focussed on the nature of everything in the world", and that's not even CLOSE to the true meaning, but it is what it is in "simple words". Now do that for every complicated word and phrase in Jagrevi's posts and you've practically got a book.

2009-11-08 19:44:00

Author:
dawesbr

Posts: 3280

its all about peace of mind if someone wants to have a God, to look over them and give them hope in hard times. Would you stop them? No. if someone was going into an operation and wanted to pray that it would be a success. Would you stop them? No.

however if someone wants to believe that there is no God, and want to make there own hope? are you going to stop them? No. i personally am an atheist and do not believe there is a God, but i dont tell people that they shouldnt be allowed to have peace of mind... because thats unfair on all of us, although there are a few flaws in the bible, doesnt stop people liking it. Just because Littlebigplanet has bugs doesnt stop many people playing it. sure some people think this isnt worth it, so quit. are they atheists?

However Which religion would be right? so far its been Christianaty Vs Atheism. id like to see other religions views on the subject.

2009-11-08 19:49:00

Author:
Kern

Posts: 5078

What he is saying is that what he wants to say is too complicated to be put in "simple words". For example, he used the word "metaphysical" a few times. To put that in simple words would be something along the lines of "something which is about everything that can't be explained by basic rules that are already established and is focussed on the nature of everything in the world", and that's not even CLOSE to the true meaning, but it is what it is in "simple words". Now do that for every complicated word and phrase in Jagrevi's posts and you've practically got a book.

thank you for saying what he wanted to say

ps: why do poeple say that the bible is fiction and all whats in it
do guys think the 10 rules of life (i forgot the name agian

) are fiction
if yes why does the police arest some body that kills a person are who steals

2009-11-08 19:59:00

Author:
Unknown User

Because killing someone is wrong. Just because the bible may or may not be ******** doesn't mean we can kill people, or break any of the other 10 commandments, regardless of whether we think they are from god or not.

I could kill a Welsh man in Chester after dark if used a longbow, and it wouldn't be against the law technically, but i still wouldn't do it, because it's not right. Seriously, that law still stands.

2009-11-08 20:37:00

Author:
Unknown User

are all my posts invisible!!!

2009-11-08 20:45:00

Author:
Kern

Posts: 5078

something made the universe.
we don't know why,we don't know what,and we'll probably never know!
and people are fighting over something we DON'T even know...its stupid!

...i know this probably offended some people but...you know its true!

God made the universe. It says so in the Lutheran Bible. Lots of people believe in The Big Bang Theory but just think... if you look around you, and you see all of these objects; trees, animals, planets, stars, etc. But think about it: they're too complicated for just one huge bang to create. It's almost impossible for all of these really complex objects to be created all at once. The scientists don't have any proof that the Big Bang Theory exists. I encourage all people reading this to think about what I just typed.

2009-11-08 20:59:00

Author:
Shockwave4

Posts: 200

2009-11-08 21:01:00

Author:
Kern

Posts: 5078

thank you for saying what he wanted to say

ps: why do poeple say that the bible is fiction and all whats in it
do guys think the 10 rules of life (i forgot the name agian

) are fiction
if yes why does the police arest some body that kills a person are who steals

Those would be laws which are not set according to the commandments, not killing is a commandment and a law here, keeping the sabath holy is a commandment but we have sunday trading laws which alow most businesses to trade for 6 hours on a sunday.

2009-11-08 21:01:00

Author:
Rabid-Coot

Posts: 6728

God made the universe. It says so in the Lutheran Bible. Lots of people believe in The Big Bang Theory but just think... if you look around you, and you see all of these objects; trees, animals, planets, stars, etc. But think about it: they're too complicated for just one huge bang to create. It's almost impossible for all of these really complex objects to be created all at once. The scientists don't have any proof that the Big Bang Theory exists. I encourage all people reading this to think about what I just typed.
I don't claim to understand what brought the universe about, but I doubt it was a omniscient, omnipotent, sentient being when so many other things could have caused it. I won't get into the details of HOW the Big Bang theory explains those things because that's an entirely different argument, but suffice to say the Big Bang theory offers much more evidence than the Bible does.

And, by the way, the bible isn't acceptable evidence in any scientific circles. I could just as well quote L. Ron Hubbard's works to support a belief in scientology, but you'd dismiss them because that's not legitimate proof, just another opinion that happens to agree with my own. Same goes in this situation.

2009-11-08 21:06:00

Author:
ConfusedCartman

Posts: 3729

The scientists don't have any proof that the Big Bang Theory exists.

You don't have any proof that god exists. It's a self defeating argument.

The big bang theory is baed upon 2 assumptions:
1. General Relativity.
2. The cosmological principle.

Both are technically theories, but have passed many vigorous tests which come very close to proving them right. Basically there is more tangible evidence for the validity of of the big bang theory than there is for the existance of God.

2009-11-08 21:07:00

Author:
rtm223

Posts: 6497

God made the universe. It says so in the Lutheran Bible. Lots of people believe in The Big Bang Theory but just think... if you look around you, and you see all of these objects; trees, animals, planets, stars, etc. But think about it: they're too complicated for just one huge bang to create. It's almost impossible for all of these really complex objects to be created all at once. The scientists don't have any proof that the Big Bang Theory exists. I encourage all people reading this to think about what I just typed.

I thought about what you just typed - I cringed. Hard. It has been proved that the universe is around 14 billion years old. In that time, the earth has had 4.5 billion to exist. In THAT time, it is VERY reasonable that simple life in the form of micro-organisms has evolved into trees, plants, etc. Stars in their essence aren't that complex. Hydrogen collects together, a lot of pressure and heat, fuses to helium, simple as. Planets are just dust in space that has coalesced. Cells are just organic compounds formed from the original materials in this coalesced space dust. Trees and animals are just bunches of cells. Evolution has much more tangible evidence than Creationism.

2009-11-08 21:12:00

Author:
dawesbr

Posts: 3280

i completly agree with Dawes,

2009-11-08 21:14:00

Author:
Kern

Posts: 5078

God made the universe. It says so in the Lutheran Bible. Lots of people believe in The Big Bang Theory but just think... if you look around you, and you see all of these objects; trees, animals, planets, stars, etc. But think about it: they're too complicated for just one huge bang to create. It's almost impossible for all of these really complex objects to be created all at once. The scientists don't have any proof that the Big Bang Theory exists. I encourage all people reading this to think about what I just typed.

So the only way for something this complex to exist... is for something even MORE complex to have created it?

Please think about what you are saying. you're saying that the only way something so complicated can exist is if something more complicated created it. If something more complicated then what you are trying to is too complicated for anything but something more complicated then we can imagine... it kinda defeats your whole purpose, no?

BTW, you know the Lutheran bible is only five hundred years old, so if you use that as the basis for your argument, then this belief only relates to 500 eyars ago. Using the bible in general would be a better choice, as then it would be two thousand years old, which is too old for anyone to even know where it came from so anyone can pretty much say anything about it :/

thank you for saying what he wanted to say

ps: why do poeple say that the bible is fiction and all whats in it
do guys think the 10 rules of life (i forgot the name agian

) are fiction
if yes why does the police arest some body that kills a person are who steals

... I won't... I can't... wow

2009-11-08 21:14:00

Author:
RockSauron

Posts: 10882

go dawes!...and thanks for backing my point!

2009-11-08 21:16:00

Author:
theswweet

Posts: 2468

Ok, in the past i was a bit harsh.. So i'll do this calmly.

---------------------------------------------------------

I'll set this out into two sections, believable and unbelievable.

---------------------------------------------------------

Unbelievable

There is a being so powerful it can create anything.
This being see's everything, everywhere and controls it all.
It had a son, a HUMAN son and this son for all intent and purpose, was a "Magician" or "Sorcerer".
There is a heaven up in the sky that when you die, you go there if you have been good in your life and followed the rules. Also it has its vice versa, Hell.
Jesus was born from a virgin.
Jesus came back to life.
Prayers will be heard by a thing that hears, computes and does all of them.

Now to break this down.

For there to be a being that could do anything, well, it sounds like a way of people conjuring an idea up to help them feel better. Also, how did that being come to exist. Oh, you'll need the scientists for that one.

This thing just cannot be able to see everything and everyone... that's over 6 BILLION eyes and thought processes. Not to mention the amount of CCTV that would be used. Also, What species is this being because it's definitely not human now is it.. refer to "Bruce Almighty".

Now this thing had a son. Why Earth?, Why Human?, Why Male?, Why That Year?. Too many why's for me. There's no logical reason. Also on the topic of being a "Magician", We all know that isn't possible and things with similar magik are found in things like "Merlin" or "Narnia".

Heaven and Hell are very clich?d ideas. I for one LOVE the idea but, seriously? It's just not gunna happen. You're seriously trying to tell me there's a place above the clouds bigger than infinity and better than all life. Would all other species go there? Hell on the other hand... Well i think of the one from "Futurama" because it's funny but again there's not going to be a workhouse and torture house of infinite size deep in the earth because the earth isn't infinite. Unless of course it has a "Tardis" Effect.. Oh wait that's another fictional Sci-Fi in the same section!

Born from a virgin eh? Now we all know that's not possible. Unless she got knocked up one night and forgot and then made the whole idea up after people started talking.

Coming back to life. No proof, Totally impossible.. Oh yeah.. DOCTOR WHO.

Prayers do not get heard. They are only one man's way of releasing stress and worries. Basically using "God" as a invisible psychiatrist. I also ask you to see the prayer scene in "Bruce Almighty" you'll see what i mean.

------------------

What this comes down to is people trying to make themselves FEEL better and give themselves HOPE. There would be no fuss if people could accept this and not push it in our faces saying it's real. If you can't cope and use this as a coping method. Go ahead, but there's no way on EARTH that it's real.

(I hope that's more mature!)

2009-11-08 21:42:00

Author:
CreateNPlay

Posts: 1266

Just saying this: Religion is optional. You don't have to do it. Besides, I find no point in atheists complaining about something they can't partake in because of their choices and that they choose not to and to tell off people with those religions. Just because it can't be proven doesn't mean it gives you the right to say "It doesn't exist", because you can't prove it either.

Next time you want to get into an arguement about religion, please, be careful on how you word things.

2009-11-08 21:44:00

Author:
Outlaw-Jack

Posts: 5757

Yes, Religion is optional. But it's just not real and for peoples own benefit i want them to understand that.

EDIT

Also i think a lot of religions are cool. I for one would love to be a Buddhist but i cannot see it happening for me.

2009-11-08 21:46:00

Author:
CreateNPlay

Posts: 1266

Indeed, Religions are awesome when they're taken metaphorically, and we're they're loose. It's awesome to have faith, and to believe in a set of moral values, but you should also be able to say your own opinions on topics. When people take the Bible as a truth and not as a metaphor and they start being morons just because it says so in revelation or Genesis or whatever, then that's just wrong. Not to say this is only applicable to Christians.. other people do it too.

2009-11-08 21:50:00

Author:
Astrosimi

Posts: 2046

It's not benefiting me.

2009-11-08 21:51:00

Author:
Outlaw-Jack

Posts: 5757

OFFTOPIC - Astro .. !?!?! Haven't seen u in ages!

Jack why do u want it to benefit you :S

2009-11-08 21:57:00

Author:
CreateNPlay

Posts: 1266

You made a dangerous thread here, comph

I'm atheist since I was 12; I simply stopped believing after thinking about a couple questions... I live in a state in wich the vatican has a huge influence on most aspect of life; a recent example of this is Eluana Englaro, a girl who entered a vegetative state and the Vatican forced her to keep on living by forcing some politicians - fortunately the "president" (I don't know how to translate it) managed to delay the law for about a week, allowing her to finally die (wikipedia link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eluana_Englaro))

From what many of you said, it seems like being atheist is a taboo in your countries... I hope it's not like that...

Born from a virgin eh? Now we all know that's not possible. Unless she got knocked up one night and forgot and then made the whole idea up after people started talking.

Well, don't get shocked, but it IS possible for a woman to give birth to a child, but the child wll be female with a chance of 100% - it's called Parthenogenesis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parthenogenesis)

2009-11-08 23:09:00

Author:
Shadowheaven

Posts: 378

Well i know about Asexual reproduction but can you find a human example for me.

2009-11-08 23:11:00

Author:
CreateNPlay

Posts: 1266

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_vitro_fertilisation

Of course, they couldn't do that 2000 years ago but that's just a minor technicality in the grand scheme of things.

2009-11-08 23:20:00

Author:
Syroc

Posts: 3193

There's not any documented case of human parthenogenesis, but cats and mice aren't so much more complex, are they?

It surely happened to humans, but I guess it happened about five times at most.

2009-11-08 23:22:00

Author:
Shadowheaven

Posts: 378

You made a dangerous thread here, comph

Yeah, I figure she's got about a few more hours of life left before I close it and slap my hands clean. Too much stress for everyone involved to keep an eye on it, y'know.

If you've got anything you'd like to add, do it now!

2009-11-08 23:25:00

Author:
comphermc

Posts: 5338

I don't think it will need closing. There have been points where it has almost got out of hand... I was involved in some of them, i should no. but no one has taken eh argument on for more than a post or two, then they let it go. This has been the most successful religion thread on the forum so far, so for that i congratulate you.

Now, to kill pandas!

2009-11-08 23:27:00

Author:
Unknown User

This threads gutta go, to many differing views.. even for a debate.

2009-11-08 23:28:00

Author:
CreateNPlay

Posts: 1266

That's the whole point of a debate, surely.

2009-11-08 23:28:00

Author:
Syroc

Posts: 3193

That's the whole point of a debate, surely.

Y'know, logic only works for so many people...

--------

I'd agree that this has been very successful, but it's quite a lot to ask for the mods and myself to keep constant tabs on it. While most everyone is keeping it mature, there are other people who are derailing it. Also, just because the issues has been dropped doesn't mean offenses were made, feeling hurt, and all that.

2009-11-08 23:38:00

Author:
comphermc

Posts: 5338

Yes but theres just TOO much.. lets stick to less sensitive debates

2009-11-08 23:47:00

Author:
CreateNPlay

Posts: 1266

Please refrain from stating your opinions as fact. The truth is, a great share of events that occur in the Bible have been historically verified from multiple sources. That you choose not to believe the remainder (which is the entire basis of this thread - what we do or do not believe) does not render it false. I'm sorry... but believing that it does is sheer arrogance.

Please don't tell me what I can and can't say especially as I am stating the truth. You are the one who chooses not to believe it. The bible is simply a middle eastern fairy tale and nothing in it has any basis in fact as you state. In thousands of years there has never been one shred of evidence to support any part of it. It's no more a factual tome than 'Lord of the Rings' or 'Hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy' and your insistance that it is just shows your ignorance of the real truth and inability to acknowledge it.

2009-11-08 23:58:00

Author:
mistervista

Posts: 2210

Please don't tell me what I can and can't say especially as I am stating the truth. You are the one who chooses not to believe it. The bible is simply a middle eastern fairy tale and nothing in it has any basis in fact as you state. In thousands of years there has never been one shred of evidence to support any part of it. It's no more a factual tome than 'Lord of the Rings' or 'Hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy' and your insistance that it is just shows your ignorance of the real truth and inability to acknowledge it.

Mistervista, you might wanna go check on that. There is large documented and archeological evidence for various events that occur in the bible.

Your post demonstrates nothing but ignorance.

2009-11-09 00:04:00

Author:
rtm223

Posts: 6497

Anyone can fabricate so called 'evidence'. Remember the 'turin shroud' ??

2009-11-09 00:07:00

Author:
mistervista

Posts: 2210

Hey, guys. It was an inevitability. I'm going to flex my newly acquired moderator muscles on this one and lock it up. Feelings are being hurt, and people are getting angry.

I'm sorry it had to end this way. Locked.

2009-11-09 00:16:00

Author:
comphermc

Posts: 5338

I know the thread just got locked, but I spent an hour plus writing out responses and I'd hate for them to not "go out". My apologetics are in italics at the end.

Sorry jagrevi, this one's entirely aimed at you. Nothing personal and I'm sure you'll handle it rather well

Historically, the arguments I'm putting forward would quite often result in my execution - trust me, I hold no ill-will for a respectful rebuttal.

None, but let me flip this around at you. Replace the word moral with immoral and see what answer you get.

Even if you go and look at specifics incidents where religion has "caused" attrocities, 9 times out of 10* the underlying motivation was not religious or spiritual. In these cases, religion is normally used as convenient tool for the manipulation of others to achieve some other goal.

This is exactly where I'd want us to go in this debate, actually. When religion is critiqued, the common defense put forward (as has been forwarded here as well) is to prop it up as a moral beacon.

You are right, religious atrocities are quite often political, and religion is just it's tool.

That being said, what a tool it is. As a tool of manipulation, religion can be used to help justify great deeds or horrible deeds, and there in is the crux of the argument.

Let us say, just as a fun thought experiment, that I have a machine in my hands with the same power to influence the minds of men. Certainly I could use it to do great things, or horrible things. I figure I am much a man like any other, part saint, part tyrant. You might even say that the machine is morally neutral, but I would disagree here, and it will probably do us both well if I underline why.

I believe in moral progress. I believe that as a society, in the long run, we philosophize, we have discussions like this one, we debate it out, and slowly we make a form a progress. Abolition of slavery, woman's rights, I believe that common philosophy in this sense is an evolving endeavor. Admittedly, a lot of religious thought in a lot of ways may be an important step along this road.

However, this brings us to the role of "God". "God" is a debate stopper, the ultimate inferred authority. Bertrand Russel referred to religion's effect as "stagnation", and I tend to agree.

Let me put it more plainly, perhaps overly plainly. In any world without such a phenomenon, "good" men would do good things, and "bad men" would do bad things.

If religion simply, as was quoted out of the bible in this very thread by a Christian believer, "enables a man to do anything", then it enables "bad" men to go great things and "good" men to horrible things.

Which is a tragedy if we suppose that men are, for the most part, good.

Again, you are perfectly right, these things do not require religion. But just because people like you and I manage to find comfort without religion doesn't undermine the fact that other people do. Finding that comfort is a very personal thing and for some people that means religion. Just because there are several means to the same end doesn't mean that only one is the "right" way and that all others are worthless.

True, and for some few even they find it in clinical delusion and are institutionalized.

I am not saying we are to find people at fault to coming to whatever conclusion they do, but certainly in practical terms we are forced to analyze the health of the path that is chosen.

I am not trying to put forth a "right" way, I'm simply concerned about the implications of the way we have chosen, as a society.

Why do you think there are so many religions that all share common aspects of our origins, life after death, morality and law. I can only think of two reasons: 1. They were all actually influenced by a genuine deity, or 2. People genuinely did need religion to achieve those comforts back then.

I think you are leaving out a factor here, and assuming that things develop only for our benefit.

To make a comparison, there are many species that have actually evolved themselves into extinction. Something develops because of it's benefits and the situation surrounding it, but ultimately cause its downfall.

Just because something inevitably develops does not speak to it's necessity. Look at chain letters. Chain letters are inevitable in the world of communication we live in today - I believe we even had a thread about this already.

Are we to assume that the message of the chain letters are true? Or that chain letters are even beneficial to us in any way? Of course not.

Just because something of this nature inevitably develops does not make it a necessity or a benefit.

No Jagrevi... this is what you are searching for. Please try to avoid imposing your agenda upon our discussion.

Let me clarify. The statement I made was about the context of a discussion I was involved in.

If I ask someone for a reason why cheese is so good for you, and they respond with a dissection of how delicious it is, it simply bears mentioning that that's not "what we were looking for".

No attempt was made to mandate the direction of the discussion, despite the heavy bolding and underlying to imply that there was.

The truth is, a great share of events that occur in the Bible have been historically verified from multiple sources.

To be fair, a lot has been directly disproven as well, such as the story of Exodus.

its all about peace of mind

It should probably be pointed out right from the start that that's an opinion. Someone could be of the mindset that it's all about peace on earth, for example.

if someone was going into an operation and wanted to pray that it would be a success. Would you stop them? No.

Of course not, they have freedom of religion (at least they should in my view - I don't know where they live and whether or not they actually have it).

However, I believe it's a Russian proverb that says

"Pray, fine; but keep rowing to shore."

To play along with this analogy, my concern isn't whether or not they're praying, it's whether or not they're rowing, and there certainly seem to be lot of people whose hands are busy in the former.

i personally am an atheist and do not believe there is a God, but i dont tell people that they shouldnt be allowed to have peace of mind

Freedom of Religion, agreed.

Enforced religious "opinion" is as vile as enforced political "opinion". That being says, I don't think not debating our politics is the way to go.

ps: why do poeple say that the bible is fiction

Primarily because it has things that have been disproven (created in 7 days, the entire story of Exodus, and so forth) and things that more rightly seem in line with things like Greek myths than history (talking burning bush, talking snake, the entire world flooding, people magically turning into pillars of salt). They are events that, the claim simply goes, did not happen.

I should point out though, that calling something fiction IS NOT claiming that it shouldn't be read. It's just claiming that it didn't actually happen like that.

do guys think the 10 rules of life (i forgot the name agian

) are fiction
if yes why does the police arest some body that kills a person are who steals

To clarify again, fiction is simply events that did not happen. "Rules" are not events. Calling the Bible fiction is not arguing against the premise that murdering is immoral.

Furthermore, as to why we arrest murders and thieves, it's because it's part of our common morality, not because of religion. Moral concepts like these have even been observed in other species of primates - they are not "religious" ideas.

As a further illustration, take the story of the 10 commandments. Now, as modern archaeology demonstrates, this event never actually happened, but that's not the point. For the sake of argument, let's just pretend that it did.

They reach the base of the mountain, wait for Moses to descend, and then are brought the commandment of "do not murder".

Do you really think they hadn't put that together on their own BEFORE it was a "commandment"? Were they just murdering each other over every little thing on the way there? I'd put forth that if they were, they would have never gotten there in the first place.

..........................

Anyways, I really don't want to make it sound like I'm just trying to have "the last word", so I'm not asking for this thread to be locked.

However, the thread itself was locked, so I'm not asking for it to be continued either.

I guess I just had already put too much effort into my responses to be silenced by having composed them as one more or less organised post, as opposed to having just spammed responses to take up the whole thread.

I have to admit I feel rather awkward doing this, but (regardless of your position) imagine how you would feel pouring your heart out about that which means so much to you in response for an hour and hitting the button a minute too late.

Anyways, do with me what you will, I'll walk away now to give others a chance to have the last word or some equivalant before this thread is locked as well.

2009-11-09 00:23:00

Author:
Jagrevi

Posts: 1154

Sorry, bud. I will allow this to be open for a few hours, as a concession.

Then, I'll merge them.

2009-11-09 00:36:00

Author:
comphermc

Posts: 5338

That's fair comphermc

hey Jagrevi - could you and the guys you'd like to continue the conversation with make a private social group that way only those who wanted to discuss could discuss without offending the general site members? Just trying to figure out how the conversation can continue but still respect the site and it's guidelines.

2009-11-09 00:47:00

Author:
Morgana25

Posts: 5983

I just feel many people in "the topic" were painted with a broad brush. It simple for people who don't believe to dismiss all people who do as diaphanous idolaters, but the truth is it's much more complicated than that otherwise it wouldn't be of so much importance to people.

I think there should be an obvious separation between any strident ideals and legislative policy. But for someone to have a little faith in something doesn't make them morons or monsters. It makes them human. Same with someone who does not. I say that as a person with no belief of her own, but knowing people who do follow a religion.

There are people on all sides that shine a terrible light on people who aren't interested in proselytizing or converting. Again, I'm talking about believers and non-believers.

It just seems like people are trying so hard to not only prove one side wrong, but to also tell the side they disagree with to detach themselves completely from something they seem to hold so dear.

Of course there are some aspects of religion that are not true. But not all people believe in every minutia of their chosen dogma. Some people live on the "flinders" of their faith. Taking the parts that are most appreciable to them and holding on to those small pieces. It gives them a sense of cohesion and a sense of totality with their world. As long as they are holding it to their chests why is it such a problem?

That's just my feelings on the matter.

Again, I'm of the mind that I don't understand why the question "do you believe in a higher power" is of any importance to me. Why must I answer it? Why do I have to be in such a framed debate? What is the question really asking?

Anyways, these will probably be my last thoughts on the subject. I hope I didn't write anything to offend anyone.

2009-11-09 00:58:00

Author:
pantspantspants

Posts: 189

Wow did I ever miss a boat-load of this. I don't even think I have time to post the extent of my thoughts, so I'm going to instead do something completely different.

Robert Crumb toiled for half a decade on the largest illustration job he's taken in his career: Illustrate the Book of Genesis.

It came out last month. It's not a satire. It's a line-for-line, honest-to-god illustration of the entire book, approached not as a satirist, but simply as an illustrator.

There is, of course, a great deal of controversy around it. this has never been attempted before. every graphical representation of the bible is always heavily modified from the original text. Crumb refuses to alter the text, and illustrates even the passages which are difficult to discern.

I don't imagine a fundamentalist would want to touch it with a ten-foot pole (fundamentalism and a stubborn core of denial must go hand-in-hand), but it's the fundamentalists that would get the most out of such a project.

I recommend it to anyone with any interest in the Bible, whether as a work of fiction or as fundamental spiritual truth.
[/reading rainbow]

http://imgur.com/WyGMg.jpg

2009-11-09 01:08:00

Author:
Teebonesy

Posts: 1937

hey Jagrevi - could you and the guys you'd like to continue the conversation with make a private social group that way only those who wanted to discuss could discuss without offending the general site members? Just trying to figure out how the conversation can continue but still respect the site and it's guidelines.

Yeah, that'd be great! I love discussing this stuff.

2009-11-09 01:09:00

Author:
mrsupercomputer

Posts: 1335

Sorry, bud. I will allow this to be open for a few hours, as a concession.

Then, I'll merge them.

Got to say I'm disappointed your newly found authority hammer didn't come crashing down here

You missed your chance to show this unruly lot that you will not tolerate any kind of insubordination!

Perhaps warn me about going off-topic? That should do it!

2009-11-09 01:22:00

Author:
jackofcourse

Posts: 1494

Hey, Jack! Let's stay on topic, shall we? I wouldn't want to have to fabricate your suicide note...

/Irony

2009-11-09 01:32:00

Author:
comphermc

Posts: 5338

However, I believe it's a Russian proverb that says

"Pray, fine; but keep rowing to shore."

To play along with this analogy, my concern isn't whether or not they're praying, it's whether or not they're rowing, and there certainly seem to be lot of people whose hands are busy in the former.

I think this is a worthwhile perspective to consider for anyone who perhaps hasn't thought of it - but one of the crucial aspects of human nature is PROGRESS. We need to progress, we need to step forward, we need to expand and improve. From this viewpoint, there's a problem with religion taking a fundamental role in our lives, especially publicly. I'm not talking about prayer and faith being a personal thing, which certainly happens but it is is NOT, unfortunately, exclusively the case in the world today. When dealing with organized religion on the massive, public scale, there's a tyranny in the old ideas. Certainly interpretions have changed; scripture has changed; but these things all have limitations, and religion suggests you don't need to go any further when all you need is here. THESE are the answers, so stop asking them. There may be no evidence for it, but if you feel it in your heart, that's good enough.

And we stand still. Progress goes by the wayside. Why go out there into the dark regions of the map? Just mark "here be dragons" and stay where you are, where you can understand your surroundings, where you can be safe.

I believe we NEED to conquer those dragons. We NEED to explore, and progress, we need to nurture that side to us that continues to question everything - not suppress it.

2009-11-09 01:51:00

Author:
Teebonesy

Posts: 1937

Wow, I just got in from church to find this rabid debate. Hehe, I guess I'll throw in my two cents. As a Christian, I believe in all of your typical things, God created the world, God created us, blah, blah, blah... but beyond that, I also strongly believe in evolution. The worst thing as a Christian for me is when I tell someone so and they reply, trying to sound like some smart d-bag with "Well how do you explain evolution!?" Seriously, creationism is a load of crap. I view a lot of the events in the Bible more as a parable opposed to true scientific facts. I believe that God created the universe to grow and expand. I believe that God created the Earth through the Big Bang... Boy, this is starting to sound new age-ish, I think I'll stop. I'm sure most of you catch my drift. But basically, my theory is that Darwin and Jesus are having a good ole' fashioned pint as we speak.

I did a little digging and found a short paper I wrote, based on the matter for school.

Position Paper: Did we really evolve from Apes?
John Livingston

In our culture today there are many theories regarding whether or not we evolved from apes, with many different beliefs and opinions. This has led to a long conflict between science and religion, coming out especially in terms of our own origins and creation. Ever since 1925 with the Scopes trial in which a 24 year old teacher in Tennessee openly taught Darwin?s theory of evolution, evolution has been a major issue of debate. Some have opposed it, on religious grounds, and criticized science. Others have believed it, and thought that religion is outdated and irrelevant. Many creationists say that God made everything just the way it is, making apes and humans. Evolutionists argue that the process of evolution caused it all, claiming that we descended from apes. But the real truth behind it all is that the theory of evolution and the biblical story of creation do not necessarily need to be in conflict. Both theories contain pieces of the puzzle, that once put together create the big picture, potentially answering whether or not we evolved from apes and where we and the rest of the universe ultimately come from.

The evolution/creation debate causes many disputes, with certain people saying one thing and others saying another. Many of these people don't seem to be able to think outside the box, and tolerate the possibility that the other side has a valid point, not realizing that there could be a divine aspect behind the theory of evolution. In this debate extremes are created on both sides. Two examples of these extreme views are (on the strict creationism side) www.creationism.org, which tries to explain how everything came to be, discussing various ideas, giving Genesis 1:1 as evidence "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." On the other side, in support of a strict evolutionary point of view, is Richard Dawkins and his book The God Delusion, which argues that because of evolution, there cannot be God. Both groups have a point to make, but they are missing the big picture of how belief in evolution and belief in a God are not necessarily incompatible. The Bible may say that God made the Earth in 7 days, but the early chapters of Genesis, like the book of Psalms, are written poetically, and not meant to be taken too literally or scientifically.

Although this begs the question how we evolved and whether or not we truly evolved from apes. Many creationists argue that the Bible says it, so it has to be true, but they miss the point. As mentioned above, Genesis isn?t meant to be read like a Science text book, with exact facts and scientific date being given. Evolution could have very-well happened, with apes evolving into humans, with God?s hand behind it. In the book Faith Seeking Understanding by the Princeton theologian Daniel Migliore, he says, ?The language of science and the language of faith must be recognized in their distinctiveness rather than collapsing one into the other. The claim that only one of these languages is the voice of truth is simply unfounded and arrogant? (Daniel Migliore, Faith Seeking Understanding, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004) pp. 95-98).

Many scientists try to answer the ?How?? question (e.g. ?How did life begin??), but religion tries to answer the ?Why?? question (e.g. ?Why are we here??), which are not questions science can answer although both areas, science and religion, are still important in answering the big picture questions. As mentioned above, both sides are still very important. Many questions cannot be answered without the other side. Apes could not have evolved without the creation of them. Humans could not have been created without the evolution of apes, everything goes hand in hand.

In terms of apes, evolution can be clearly seen here. Apes contain so many similarities to us human beings; it just goes to show how evolution happened. Apes have a very similar bone and DNA structure to ours, being less then a 2% difference. They have a complex mind and are able to use tools. Apes also share many of our emotions and feelings, being happy and sad, feeling pain and love. In the short documentary; ?Apes, so like us?, hosted by Jane Goodall, she explained many of the emotions that apes have. One of the most notable was the fear and anger in the scene in which a younger ape chased away the leader ape, casting him out of the tribe. He ran away and hid from the others. To me at least, this shows how advanced they truly are, and also how only a God could create something like this.

Both theories of evolution and creation have their own aspects and points, but at the end of the day, both theories need each other in order to properly prove that we descended from apes and how life began as a whole.

2009-11-09 02:02:00

Author:
FULLGORR

Posts: 245

My answer to the progress question is since when in history did everyone get on the same boat and row in the same direction?

The answer is never. There can be people who have different ideals and progress can still be achieved. You're not going to convince people who are already convinced themselves that their truth is the only truth. It only becomes an issue when religion is used politically which I've already stated I admonish in every single way possible.

If progress was impossible we would not know as much as we already do now. So, if someone happens to believe in a deity what can we do to stop them? Non-believers say they have the evidence and even actually have explained it throughly to the devout, but it falls on deaf ears.

Why exhaust yourselves on winning converts when you can spend your time finding the answers?

The truth is progess is inevitable and the boat will reach the shore despite who is rowing or not.

The question seems to be how can we make the boat go faster?

The answer to that I don't know.

I don't know if that made any sense.

2009-11-09 02:40:00

Author:
pantspantspants

Posts: 189

*Sigh* You fools can't see the true creator, even when his noodley appendage is pushing down on you right now.

RAmen.

2009-11-09 03:17:00

Author:
qrtda235566

Posts: 3664

Right on cue.

I like the idea of a religious debate group (or any other topic for that matter). I'll let anyone who wants to handle that set it up. As for me, this was quite the interesting debate while it lasted. Hope this was sufficient, Jagrevi.

Thanks to everyone who contributed.

Locked and Merged.

2009-11-09 03:28:00

Author:
comphermc

Posts: 5338

LBPCentral Archive Statistics

Posts: 1077139 Threads: 69970 Members: 9661 Archive-Date: 2019-01-19

Datenschutz

Aus dem Archiv wurden alle persönlichen Daten wie Name, Anschrift, Email etc. - aber auch sämtliche Inhalte wie z.B. persönliche Nachrichten - entfernt.
Die Nutzung dieser Webseite erfolgt ohne Speicherung personenbezogener Daten. Es werden keinerlei Cookies, Logs, 3rd-Party-Plugins etc. verwendet.