Judge Hades Posted February 20, 2004 Share Posted February 20, 2004 Very well stated. Hades let me ask you a rhetorical question. Lets say that you believe in God and you believe that the only way to heaven is to embrace Christ as your savior because he died on the cross for your sins. Knowing that, wouldn't you do everything within your power to bring as many people to Christ as you could knowing that the alternative is eternity in hell? What greater thing could you do for someone than that? Nothing. I think you may be condemning what you do not understand. I understand Christianity. I used to be a Christian, but then I saw the world as it truly is. There is no God. There is no Heaven to strive for, and no Hell to fear. There is only the here and now and nothing else. I expect people to respect one's personal space. If I wanted to learn about Jesus, Muhammad, Abraham, Buddha, Vishnu, and so forth I would continue my education at the university and move from having a minor in Relgious Studies to a major. If I wanted to do worship I would go to the appropriate building to do so or do so in private of my own home. For a more direct response to your query I would also respect others that not everyone believe the way I do so I wouldn't harass them on the street telling them to convert. They have their path, and I have mine and I would mind my spirituality than try to mind someone elses. (Atreides @ Feb 20 2004, 11:43 AM) (Hades_One @ Feb 20 2004, 07:53 AM) Here on the forums its not that big of a deal/ Its on the street of real life that where my problem is at. Didn't you say you were disturbed by the Ayatollah guy's constant references to religion? No, but I do not like how he is portraying Muslims. I have friends who are Muslims and the way he is going off is a mockery to their beliefs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FO24EvA Posted February 21, 2004 Share Posted February 21, 2004 People like these give the rest of us protestants a bad name.....why do we need church? Why do we need to force our beliefs down the throats of those who sadly, don't give a damn. I tried to read this self-righteous banter but I could not stand it. I think that church should be ended. People should all go home and worship the God they believe in and don't tell anyone who isn't interested about it. When we die. Then we'll have either an eternity to be joyful, an eternity of regret, a mortal coil left in a 2,000 dollar casket (damn theiving funeral homes), a new life as an insect or rat, or a place in purgatory, the list goes on and on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craftsman Posted February 21, 2004 Share Posted February 21, 2004 Very well stated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drakron Posted February 21, 2004 Share Posted February 21, 2004 I am stun ... I never belived ... ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhombus Posted February 21, 2004 Share Posted February 21, 2004 And Rhombus, I don't care if you believe I'll burn in hell. That's your right - just don't try to force it on the rest of us through government. You don't seem likely to do that, so I will also turn the other cheek. Judge not lest ye be judged. I put the "burn in hell" thing in "" like I did again because I don't necesarily believe in the burning in hell thing literally... more the way that God lets those that don't want anything to do with him to... well... don't have anything to do with him... and since God is the source of existence and is everywhere... non-existence is, well, what hell is. eternal consequences, not an eternal punishment. "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall NOT PERISH but have eternal life"... perish usually don't mean to "burn forever in a lake of fire"... but oh well, same diffrence perhaps. On the second part, forcing anyone to anything seems wrong to me, I try to live my life the way I believe if people asks why I tell them, but I do practice my religion publically... What do you want?.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Hades Posted February 21, 2004 Share Posted February 21, 2004 Just because you don't understand who the universe came to be doesn't mean that some diety had a hand in it. In time science will progress far enough that humanity will understand what happened all those billions of years ago. Think on this, a thousand years ago people thought the world was flat. There was this nasty superstition that if you go far enough you will fall off. That was proven wrong, and so will God's existance. I rather go by what I know than go by faith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Paddy Posted February 21, 2004 Share Posted February 21, 2004 Okay, prove to me there is a god? Show me concrete scientific evidence of God then. Show me the evidence that Satan exists as well, or even the mythical figure Death. WHile you are at it show me the evidence that Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny exists as well. There is no evidence. Just some stories that are centuries old with very little archeaological evidence to back them up. Tell me Neriana, how do you know it was God and not some neural chemical reaction dictating your emotional state? As long as religious people get in my face and scream out "BELIEVE OR BURN IN HELL!" I will get into their face and scream out how I feel about them and their beliefs. That's funny, because none of us has done that. So it's you being a fanatic isn't it? No, nobody can prove there is a God, but neither can you prove there isn't. It's one of the oldest and most pointless arguments ever. I believe there is a God. I really believe we all have souls, and that's where moral compunctions and a self awareness stem from. I've stood on the west coast of Kerry for hours, just staring out at the horizon. I can really feel something, I don't know what it is, and I'm not nearly poetic enough to describe it without sounding like a dramatic jackass. If it's a chemical reaction in my brain with foggy dew and sea-fresh smell as the catalyst, then fine, that's what it is. I'll die and that'll be the end, just like all the earth worms and seagulls which have died before me. I don't see how believing in a God makes you weak minded. The alternative, Oblivion, is not good nor bad, it just isn't. So in that case, it wouldn't be something to dread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sammael Posted February 21, 2004 Share Posted February 21, 2004 Show me the evidence that Satan exists <-----| Q.E.D. There are no doors in Jefferson that are "special game locked" doors. There are no characters in that game that you can kill that will result in the game ending prematurely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadowstrider Posted February 21, 2004 Share Posted February 21, 2004 ... and like Hades said, words means s***, actions means everything... that's why I try, like St Francis, preach the gospel whenever and wherever I am, and if I have to I use words... My reason for eating pork is because Jesus said that it's not what comes in through the mouth but what comes out (what I say) that makes a man unclean. Which is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craftsman Posted February 22, 2004 Share Posted February 22, 2004 Just because you don't understand who the universe came to be doesn't mean that some diety had a hand in it. In time science will progress far enough that humanity will understand what happened all those billions of years ago. Think on this, a thousand years ago people thought the world was flat. There was this nasty superstition that if you go far enough you will fall off. That was proven wrong, and so will God's existance. I rather go by what I know than go by faith. Here are three thoughts that evevently prove that there is a God. 1)First, the world seems to work according to the universal law of cause and effect. That is, every observable effect must have had an initial "push" by some agent or cause. Every "thing" (a highly scientific term) that we observe is dependent upon other "things" for its existence. For example, children are dependent on parents and the earth is dependent on the sun. Thinking all the way back to the first event, it could be asked, who was the cause? This is where it appears that there must be a being that is "uncaused." Philosophers like to call this a necessary being. Could that be God? 2)A second sign that should be considered is what scientists today are calling the marks of Intelligent Design. The suggestion is that the universe exhibits purpose, design, and intent. This is not a new idea; William Paley suggested that if you were walking through a field and found a watch on the ground that you would recognize it as a piece of machinery that had purpose and did not simply grow in the forest like plants and trees. A rational conclusion would be that someone intentionally built the watch. The universe is infinitely more complex than a watch and as a result points that much more to an intelligent designer. 3)A third mark has to do with the moral foundation of the universe. C. S. Lewis referred to this as the "law of human nature." This is not to say that people everywhere are in agreement on all moral values, but that everyone does tend to live by certain common moral principles. For example, people and cultures have different ideas about when it is appropriate to take another person's life, but no one (that would be considered sane) would hold that indiscriminate cold-blooded murder for no reason would be appropriate. It appears that humanity has been intentionally created with an internal moral compass. All three of these marks appeal to our common sense and fit observations that can be made about the world. Everyone may not be completely convinced by this reasoning, but it seems to make more sense to believe that God is real than that he is not. If that is true, then maybe there are other things that can be known about God. Why don't you try to pick up the trail and see where it leads? (from http://www.everystudent.com/wires/Godreal.html) So hades sorry mate, but it just seems that u lose this round and u always will. U keep on thinking that u right. What makes u so special? Hades u got the choice mate. Thats all i wanna say. Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Lord Revan Posted February 22, 2004 Share Posted February 22, 2004 Just because you don't understand who the universe came to be doesn't mean that some diety had a hand in it. Evil will always triumph because good is dumb! prostytutka Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drakron Posted February 22, 2004 Share Posted February 22, 2004 So he is wrong because you pull (unproven and highly debateble) theorie that says he is wrong. And who says YOUR god is behind it besides Faith because you and nobody knows ... they have FAITH they are right but that is pretty about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Lord Revan Posted February 22, 2004 Share Posted February 22, 2004 So he is wrong because you pull (unproven and highly debateble) theorie that says he is wrong. And who says YOUR god is behind it besides Faith because you and nobody knows ... they have FAITH they are right but that is pretty about it. Um, I think you are a bit mistaken here. Quantum Mechanics is not an unproven and debatable theory. In fact there is little debate about it, it has been tested to within an accuracy of 1 part in 10 to the thirty seven! Just ask any physicist, he will tell you the same thing. Sorry, but you must realize that you are debating quantum theory with a physics nerd, you will lose. One of the cool things about quantum mechanics is that it is totally bizzare and completely defies reason, but this is how the universe works. The same is true with God I guess. He asks alot to believe, but it is the truth. Evil will always triumph because good is dumb! prostytutka Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craftsman Posted February 22, 2004 Share Posted February 22, 2004 Thats right. He cant be proven with solid scientic evidence, becasue he does not wish to. That is the point of faith. If he could be proven of course everyone would believe. But its your choice to believe. Also i believe that christian, muslim, hundi ect all have the same God as all have similar ideals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atreides Posted February 22, 2004 Share Posted February 22, 2004 ^There might be something in that with monotheism (Islam, Christianity, Judism etc) but Hinduism is polytheism, which would really contradict monotheism (and vice versa, of course). Spreading beauty with my katana. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drakron Posted February 22, 2004 Share Posted February 22, 2004 Um, I think you are a bit mistaken here. Quantum Mechanics is not an unproven and debatable theory. In fact there is little debate about it, it has been tested to within an accuracy of 1 part in 10 to the thirty seven! Just ask any physicist, he will tell you the same thing. Sorry, but you must realize that you are debating quantum theory with a physics nerd, you will lose. One of the cool things about quantum mechanics is that it is totally bizzare and completely defies reason, but this is how the universe works. The same is true with God I guess. He asks alot to believe, but it is the truth. Sorry, I started posted before you did so that was not addressed to your post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Hades Posted February 22, 2004 Share Posted February 22, 2004 1)First, the world seems to work according to the universal law of cause and effect. That is, every observable effect must have had an initial "push" by some agent or cause. Every "thing" (a highly scientific term) that we observe is dependent upon other "things" for its existence. For example, children are dependent on parents and the earth is dependent on the sun. Thinking all the way back to the first event, it could be asked, who was the cause? This is where it appears that there must be a being that is "uncaused." Philosophers like to call this a necessary being. Could that be God?COuld it be a god? There is no evidence that it is, on the other side of things there is no evidence otherwise. Simply put there is no evidence and if you want to say it is god and use faith that is your business, not mine. I'll wait for the proof. 2)A second sign that should be considered is what scientists today are calling the marks of Intelligent Design. The suggestion is that the universe exhibits purpose, design, and intent. This is not a new idea; William Paley suggested that if you were walking through a field and found a watch on the ground that you would recognize it as a piece of machinery that had purpose and did not simply grow in the forest like plants and trees. A rational conclusion would be that someone intentionally built the watch. The universe is infinitely more complex than a watch and as a result points that much more to an intelligent designer. Or it could be just by chance. As I said, there is no evidence in either case. The Universe is what it is and compare to what we humans no of the universe and what is actually there we haven't even touched the surface of what is knowable. Just because we don't know with any sort of certainty on how the universe was formed doesn't mean some diety had a hand in it. 3)A third mark has to do with the moral foundation of the universe. C. S. Lewis referred to this as the "law of human nature." This is not to say that people everywhere are in agreement on all moral values, but that everyone does tend to live by certain common moral principles. For example, people and cultures have different ideas about when it is appropriate to take another person's life, but no one (that would be considered sane) would hold that indiscriminate cold-blooded murder for no reason would be appropriate. It appears that humanity has been intentionally created with an internal moral compass. I know of this. I have studied anthropology and in such studies there is a term for this called Universal Taboos. One Universal Taboo is incest. Of course that depends on what you consider blood relations, which can differ from culture to culture. I wouldn't call this as a moral foundation, but apart of the human instinct. Jame Goodall's studies of Chimpanzees has also catagorized similar behavior as human beings exhibit. Its on an instinctual level, not on a moral level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorth Posted February 22, 2004 Share Posted February 22, 2004 Sorry Craftsman, but your arguments begs for counter arguments... Before anybody declares religious war on me, i do believe in more between heaven and earth, just not in the validity of the three arguments presented. First argument, cause and effect. Who said something (or somebody) caused it to *be* It could just be in a state of constant change. Take a look at a ring and try to explain where it starts and where it ends ? An unrewarding task. Second argument, intelligent design. See first argument. With unlimited time for the universe should have learned its lesson by now and come up with a decent design. Ehhh.... how is it an intelligent design ? Third argument, moral foundations. Its called evolution. Different species, different strategies for procreation and preservation of *your* particular genes. If evolution deems it a better strategy to avoid senseless killing in a species, it will become part of that species nature only to do it, if there is a perceived advantage in doing so (fights over food, girls, prestige, whatever) Personally, I like to look for answers to the mysteries of life myself first, and if i can't explain it then, consider myself not bright enough to figure it out. And then try to look for metaphysical explanations. I haven't figured out how to use the quote functions yet, but i dont blame that on a divine being... Its just one of those things in life, that if i persevere, i will find an answer to it (like rtfm)... “He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would surely suffice.” - Albert Einstein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craftsman Posted February 22, 2004 Share Posted February 22, 2004 Go through this site. It should quash your ignorance. http://self-improvement-personal-developme...m/p_view_a.html Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorth Posted February 22, 2004 Share Posted February 22, 2004 Go through this site. It should quash your ignorance. http://self-improvement-personal-developme...m/p_view_a.html Cheers Went through the site. Most shocking. If so many people feel the need to be the center of the universe, small wonder that the world is full of conflict. I guess "faith" whatever people believe in is exactly that, the ability to believe in something intangible (heart over mind). Either you have it or you don't. An old heathen like me likes to question everything. Often what was once unknown may be revealed in time (like the quote function, yipee!). If we didn't question our surroundings, who knows where we would be now? Yes, I know, a question open for lot of subjective interpretations. Cheers “He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would surely suffice.” - Albert Einstein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craftsman Posted February 22, 2004 Share Posted February 22, 2004 Your arguments are not arguements at all but more like dementing the truth. It like there is a blue pencil, but your saying well its red to a person who can only see red. That person is a sense is u. U choose NOT to accept in any form a truth about a greater being. Even though there are countless tales of miricles and spiritutual enlighment, u comfort yourselve by not believing in them or a God so that in a attept to feel no guilt for the wrongs of your life. You want to be 'free'. U want to ahve to answer to no one. So then what is the point of your existence. To live the way u want and die and if u were never born. No. Ultimate happiness is with the creator. Our perpose on earth is to live good faithful lives and to resist evils temptations. None of us a perfect and we all sin. But God forgives if u are sincere. Sorry but i forgot u dont believe that. This life is here for fun and then its over. That would work..if only it made sense. Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drakron Posted February 22, 2004 Share Posted February 22, 2004 Your arguments are not arguements at all but more like dementing the truth ... <snip because nobody deserves to read THAT again, well perhaps with the exception the MB clan members> You are the one that have no argument besides using highly debatle theories to futher or belives. Also you are posting to futher your religious belives, your posts are incredible biased towars your religion (God this, God that) and everything that present a alternative to what your religion says it plain wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Hades Posted February 22, 2004 Share Posted February 22, 2004 Truth is relative, Craftman. Always have been and always will be. One man's good can be another man's evil. Its all depends on interpretation. I have no faith, and never will. I use empirical rationalism as a guide and nothing else. So far it has done a better job than when I did have faith and followed Christianity. I don't need a god to forgive me and my "sins." I am a human being with human imperfections and I embrace my imperfections for it is what makes me human. And here is another question for you, why there must be a point of existance? Its all random, chaos, and ultmately meaningless. I accept that and embrace it and I continue my life doing what I want to do. In my world there is no good or evil, only me and how I interpret the world around me. Nothing more and nothing less. I don't need a god to forgive me. I don't need a god to be faithful to. I need no spirituality to command my life. If you can't deal with that then you have the problem, not me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarjahurmaaja. Posted February 22, 2004 Share Posted February 22, 2004 Why should I believe in something that can't be proven to exist? Just because it can't be disproven? Very well, then. Craftsman, I'm the second coming of Jesus Christ. God said so. You must do exactly as I say, or you'll burn in hell for all eternity. If you question my authority, you'll be torn to bits and eaten by hellhounds when you die. It will hurt, a lot. Oh, by the way, first order is to go burn a church. They're all infidels. You will be rewarded in Heaven. Have a nice day. - The Big J 9/30 -- NEVER FORGET! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother None Posted February 22, 2004 Share Posted February 22, 2004 1)First, the world seems to work according to the universal law of cause and effect. That is, every observable effect must have had an initial "push" by some agent or cause. Every "thing" (a highly scientific term) that we observe is dependent upon other "things" for its existence. For example, children are dependent on parents and the earth is dependent on the sun. Thinking all the way back to the first event, it could be asked, who was the cause? This is where it appears that there must be a being that is "uncaused." Philosophers like to call this a necessary being. Could that be God? Philosophers? Ey? I'd like to inform you of the fact that the philosophical construct of "the Great Mover" was made in a time and area where and when nobody had any form of a monotheistic faith, unless there were some jews hanging around. The Greeks were polytheistic, I'd like to remind you. Also, your thinking has a logical flaw If EVERY event has a cause, which is the assumption that proves your argument, than God also must have a cause. "But," you'll say, "that's not true, because God is eternal" Well then, you just disproved your own theory. If God is eternal, there is something which needs no cause. If it is a fact that there is something that needs no cause than there's no basis to assume that God is the only thing that could be eternal. Or, in other words, the assumption that the galaxy hasn't been around forever collapses in on itself. Ipso factum. 2)A second sign that should be considered is what scientists today are calling the marks of Intelligent Design. The suggestion is that the universe exhibits purpose, design, and intent. This is not a new idea; William Paley suggested that if you were walking through a field and found a watch on the ground that you would recognize it as a piece of machinery that had purpose and did not simply grow in the forest like plants and trees. A rational conclusion would be that someone intentionally built the watch. The universe is infinitely more complex than a watch and as a result points that much more to an intelligent designer. Again you disprove your own theory: "(...) found a watch on the ground that you would recognize it as a piece of machinery that had purpose and did not simply grow in the forest like plants and trees." This seems to state that a watch is a purposefully built piece of machinery while the forest and plants "simply grew", and hence are not a purposefully built piece of machinery. But that's just wordplay and unfair. So why is there "intelligent design" in the universe? Simple, because that's the only way it could survive. "How Darwinistic of you, Kharn". I know, but despite the fact that I dislike Darwin and especially Social-Darwinism with fervour, there is something to be said for the basis of the Evolution theory. It is a matter of simply weeding out the bad thing. The universe, arguably, was born at a certain point or, at the very least, transcended from a simple state of "still-being" (before the Big Bang, when change and therefor time did not exist). After its birth it began to develop. As it develops, it goes several routes. Say there's another planet with living things, but it's ecosystem is entirely different from that of earth and furthermore, it turns out not to work, and all living things die. Because only planets that can sustain life eventually sustain life, it seems very much so like it is planned, like a number of planets were created to sustain life. But this is simply not true, all planets have the potential-life, but "by chance" a number of them actually grow to sustain life. This way of growing, evolving, eventually ends up in a huge ordered structure because the useless bits die out off themselves. There's no reason to assume there's a planner that structurized the universe to be a certain way beforehand, because the universe simply grew into this form. 3)A third mark has to do with the moral foundation of the universe. C. S. Lewis referred to this as the "law of human nature." This is not to say that people everywhere are in agreement on all moral values, but that everyone does tend to live by certain common moral principles. For example, people and cultures have different ideas about when it is appropriate to take another person's life, but no one (that would be considered sane) would hold that indiscriminate cold-blooded murder for no reason would be appropriate. It appears that humanity has been intentionally created with an internal moral compass. How caustistic, but how wrong Which was first, the chicken or the egg? Now think of another question: which was first, the laws that structured human society or the structure of human society? Why don't humans kill each other at random? Because a society structured on random killing would (anarchistic theories aside) collapse even before being founded. And doubtlessely, there we societies founded on this principle, but naturally enough the strongest societies were, on the long term, those who internally (not externally, war is alright) decided that killing was wrong. After this decision was made, a law was written up that killing was wrong. We call this morality, and we pretend that the code of morality is older than the act, but we're wrong Take the transcension from Medieval society to the Renaissance. In the Medieval society, violence to those lower in the food chain was alright, as was killing people lower in the food chain for no reason. There was no monopoly of violence, everyone had the right to be violent as long as it was to a subordinate. And the Medieval society never progressed. When did Western Europe progress? When it shed off the concept of free violence and placed the monopoly of violence in the ruling body (a monarch, mostly, in that time). By placing the monopoly of violence with this man or, later, with this governmental structure you forbid violence within the society, and allow it to grow. If the above is not true, then go figure; why is war condoned, and murder not? Ipso factum again... inXile line producer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts