[Eugine]

Lets discus the advantage, disadvantages of religion and the one you follow. Of course you can disagree with others religion but please don't abuse the flaming, thanks.

Well, what's your religion? I'm Christian, but not a devout one. I also have an open mind to religion. What are the flaws of my religion? Lets discus. :)

[Bexie]

I'm Atheist.

I used to be Christian, but I stopped believing for reasons I really don't want to talk about.
Besides, I don't think I was ever really Christian. I was just told to be and dragged to church by my mother since I was a baby, basically.

Bah.

Sorry, I'm not really imputting much, am I? xD

[Someone Else]

I don't like how people try to "brainwash" you into their religion when you're young. It should be your choice; like Bexie said, you're not REALLY a Christian unless you believe and worship God from your experiences.

I'm Agnostic. There are different kinds of Agnotism, I'm sort of the kind where I'm "indifferent" and/or unsettled on what to believe. I'm happy that way, too! :)

[Mars Djinni]

I'm semi-devout Catholic.

I'd like to make a little clarification first, though. See, when you think of Religion, the first thing that comes to mind is a god. Well, the true meaning of Religion is one's way of life, and the beleifs, attitudes, and ethics that one uses to live his/her life. So really, everyone has a "religion", regardless if they beleive in a god. People live by what they accept as right, by their moral conscience.

The advantages of my faith are that it opens up a different view of things, contextually. Through experiences one is made to beleive that GOD works behind the scenes, and helps interpret what one should change in life or keep going. Miracle or no, I take from life what I need to better change my course.

[Platinum Sun]

If I wasn't and agnostic, I would be a Methodist. I believe that there must be something more to life, but I just can't swallow all this 'miracle' crap.

[FlamingDuck]

I don't know what agnostic is :)

I'm a Presbytarian. I'm not sure what the difference is between us and all them other Christian catagories, but there is a difference. I like to think that the way to live your life to the fullest is to have something to believe in, so that's what I do.

[Someone Else]

People seem to have different definitions for agnotism, but this is the most general one:

Quote

...a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/agnostic

[XCheater 2by4]

Mine is semi-devoted to Buddhism. :)

Hey Wind Dude, please elaborate more about your religion. I'd love to learn more about that particular religion!

[Golden Legacy]

Hey there... didn't we talk on MSN recently?

And being Agnostic means that you more or less don't have a specific religion. As Wind Dude posted, they may recognize God (or "a god") but don't follow a strict moral code or religious duty.

[Toasty]

I'm a devout Christian. I believe beyond the shadow of a doubt that god, and miracles exist. I've even seen at least one miracle. And I also believe that whatever happens, whether it seems good or bad, happens for a good reason, and that the result is always good. Sometimes it's just very hard to find.

[XCheater 2by4]

No, we talked on AIM. :)

Hm, it seems Wind Dude is like a couple of my friends. o_o

[Someone Else]

Aye? Agnotism isn't what I would call technically a religion. What the definition says is pretty much as deep as it goes.

[My Best Wishes]

I say Agnotism is as much a religion as being an athiest. Which in my opinion doesn't count for crap.

I fall under the catagory Christian.

I regulary attend church, have friends but I dunno if I believe or not. Like Bexie my whole life I've been told it's true but thats way too different then knowing for yourself.

[Eugine]

Eve of Destiny, you practically said exactly what I was going to say except for the

Quote

I am a Born-Again Christian.

I have been a Christian for 14 years,

part. I'm working on that part though.

[Golden Legacy]

Eve of Destiny, on Aug 10 2006, 11:49 AM, said:

I have been a Christian for 14 years, and my faith is something that I hold very close to me. My faith in God has helped me through a lot of struggles, and I know that this is something I would never stray from. I've found what I'm comfortable and secure in, and what I feel is best for my life.

I wholeheartedly believe that everyone should be able to make the choice about what they want to believe in. I know a lot of people don't believe in God and don't ever want to, but that's okay. Everyone's different. Personally, from my experiences, I don't know how I could live through what I have without God. To say that I don't believe would be to mock the very one who's held me together.

While everyone's entitled to making the choice for themselves, I do think that whether you do believe or not, you should definitely respect how other people feel on the subject--even if their beliefs are different than yours. Some people can be pretty offensive, and nobody needs that.

Wonderfully said. I completely agree. To those who believe in God (people like us), that faith is closely integrated into our own lives, and without that foundation, we'd go astray, not knowing how to continue or what decisions to make.

For those who don't, however, a certain amount of mutual respect should always be present.

Again, very nicely said, Eve of Destiny.

[Joshua Johnson]

Don't get mad at me, but I'm an evolutionist... I believe in Evo... Yup. *fears others that now want to kill him*

[Golden Legacy]

There are actually those who believe evolution and religion could fit in together.

The theory is this: according to the monotheistic religions (Islam, Chrisitainity, Judaism), God created the universe in six days. However, a "day" to him, may be a day, a year, a millenium, or even millions of years in our lives.

I actually don't believe in Evolution, but I just thought I'd mention that.

[Eugine]

Read Angels and Demons by Dan Brown, it poses a plausable theory on how the world was created.
I believed it for a while...

[Joshua Johnson]

Hmmm... I believe strictly in Evo, though. It just seems most logical to me. *is still hiding*

[Mars Djinni]

That's how I see it. I was talking with Izar about it, I think it's called "Theistic Evolution". It's like God was molding clay, but took time and patience to form us step by step. Some of the steps he kept as the fish in the sea, birds in the air.

Like GL, I'm not 100% on this, but giving an interpretation of how science and religion can coexist.

[Joshua Johnson]

See, I believe in the whole process of chemical reactions creating everything, probably through the transfer of wind, etc.

[Eugine]

Evolution would have been more logicial if we actually saw more... Evolutions...

Mutations are very rare to come about and most of the time are harmful, so the chances of it is pretty slim. I'm not saying it's fake, it's just premature to say its the truth.

[Joshua Johnson]

Well, the Eart's been around for a long time. Anything could've happened.

[Somia]

I see, alot of Christians here.

Well, see, I don't know which of those catagories I belong to. I have my own believes, but it's not specific so... I sorta believe a mix of different religions but not all of it. On top of that, I think of others things as well.

[Joshua Johnson]

I'm the lone wolf in my family, being the only evolutionist... Everyone else is Catholic.

[Eugine]

Oh well, explain to me why you believe in Evolution. Most people believe in it without even knowing 1/2 of the story.

[Joshua Johnson]

Like I said, it just makes the most sense to me. You know, the whole amoeba thing created through chemical reactions, thus bringing life. Lived in water, etc. Evolved, to a point where it mutated into numerous things.

[Bexie]

Joshua Johnson, on Aug 10 2006, 07:01 PM, said:

Don't get mad at me, but I'm an evolutionist... I believe in Evo... Yup. *fears others that now want to kill him*

*raises hand* So do I.

... *pokes poll results* Am I really the only godless heathen here? lol.

EDIT: Jedi should have been a choice. I always write "Jedi" on forms in the religion box.

[FlamingDuck]

Evolution seems to half make sense to me. It seems that the world would need to be around for a lot less amount of time for it to fit in with my beliefs, but maybe my sense of time is just a little wacked.

[Platinum Sun]

I believe that God created the world through the scientific explanation, so the two theories are just different perspectives on our origins. With this line of thinking I will either found my own religion, or get lynched by an angry mob. Or both...

[Joshua Johnson]

Don't worry, Piers will protect you. He'll douse the torches... But he can't do anything about the pitchforks...

In reality...

It's a good theory. My only problem with eveolution is well... I feel alone on my beliefs... Most people I know (especially the reaallly HOT girls) are full-on Christians...

[Platinum Sun]

That's no reason to feel ashamed of them. They wouldn't be your beliefs if you just copied them from someone else.

[Joshua Johnson]

I'm just saying, religion can be like racism. It subdivides people, and it can be hard to get along in real life. So the only way anyone will ever be able to solve it is a basic impossible... So, you'd almost have to find a mate with the same beliefs as you in order for cooperation. I'm not saying cross-religion hasn't been done before, but it leads to far more problems in life later on.

[Golden Legacy]

Eugine, on Aug 10 2006, 02:20 PM, said:

Evolution would have been more logicial if we actually saw more... Evolutions...

Mutations are very rare to come about and most of the time are harmful, so the chances of it is pretty slim. I'm not saying it's fake, it's just premature to say its the truth.

Joshua Johnson, on Aug 10 2006, 02:22 PM, said:

Well, the Eart's been around for a long time. Anything could've happened.

Joshua Johnson, on Aug 10 2006, 03:05 PM, said:

Like I said, it just makes the most sense to me. You know, the whole amoeba thing created through chemical reactions, thus bringing life. Lived in water, etc. Evolved, to a point where it mutated into numerous things.

FlamingDuck, on Aug 10 2006, 03:36 PM, said:

Evolution seems to half make sense to me. It seems that the world would need to be around for a lot less amount of time for it to fit in with my beliefs, but maybe my sense of time is just a little wacked.

There is one thing I've never been able to accept about Evolution. How is it that over the course of billions of years, through random mutations, we emerged as we are today? Doesn't it seem slightly far-fetched? The chances of us being evolved to the point where we can think and create for ourselves... it's an extremely slim possibility, if you consider it.

[Platinum Sun]

You have no basis for comparison to make that observation. You haven't lived for four billion years, neither has anyone else, and there are no records from that era. A lot can happen in four billion years.
I'll give you that evolution can be likened to a tornado assembling a 747 by hitting a junkyard, but these timescales are nothing like we've ever seen before. True, bery little if any noticable evolution has happened in the course of recorded history, but recorded history only goes back about three thousand years at best. Don't make such concrete absolutions about timescales you can't even concieve, no one has the perspective to do that.

[Golden Legacy]

If we can't conceive it, then isn't there a very good possibility that it's not true?

[Eugine]

He never debunked the theory of Evolution. He simply said it's a bit far-fetched.

Anyway, read this link. I personally love point nine.

[Platinum Sun]

Far-fetched is exactly what I was getting at. Yet that's what all unified theories are. Life exists. That proves that it got here somehow.

[Mars Djinni]

Bexie, on Aug 10 2006, 12:29 PM, said:

*raises hand* So do I.

... *pokes poll results* Am I really the only godless heathen here? lol.

EDIT: Jedi should have been a choice. I always write "Jedi" on forms in the religion box.

Edit the poll I shall; if want it, you do. :P

Joshua Johnson, on Aug 10 2006, 01:37 PM, said:

I'm just saying, religion can be like racism. It subdivides people, and it can be hard to get along in real life. So the only way anyone will ever be able to solve it is a basic impossible... So, you'd almost have to find a mate with the same beliefs as you in order for cooperation. I'm not saying cross-religion hasn't been done before, but it leads to far more problems in life later on.

My TaeKwonDo instructor is athiest yet he gets along well with his wife, who is Buddhist, IIRC. As for me, I'm willing to get along with others of different religions. So long as they know and respect my faith, I will be willing to do the same for them. Faith can really be deep for them. It's a crushing blow to someone if another is ignorant towards their faith. I'm not willing to do that.

[Toasty]

All of my many friends and accuaintences are either Christian, or Morman. Even though I don't agree with morman religion at all, I still respect my friends.

And I'd also like to add on to that article of yours Eugine (I liked 7 & 9 myself), a Christian scientist and mathmetician, who had study the bible to a very long extent, calculated how long (starting from Adam and Eve) it would take for the amount of people in the world today, to have populated the earth. And according to the bible and the census's taken throughout history, he figured that the earth is about 10 thousand (not million or billion) years old. Also, scientists have discovered that the earth is gradually slowing down. If the earth was ten billion, or even ten million years old, the earth would be spining so fast, and the wind speeds would be so horendous, that a category 5 tornado would be considered "a light breeze." As for the theory of the earth origonally being one super continent, in the bible, the story of the great flood could explain why the world looks like it does today. In the story, as well as heavy rains causing floods, it said that "water seemed to come shooting up out of the ground." That could have caused the land to split. I'd be like jetstreams of water carving away at the land from below. Continental drift could have had a bit to do with it though, but not as much as scientists say.

A lot of my points are based on beliefe, but they can at least be partially backed up by the info in the article Eugine posted.

[My Best Wishes]

Eugine, on Dec 26 2005, 10:51 AM, said:

FAR LATEX3:
you guys make religion sound so bad (Watch and Izar)! perfect example in show why some people detest religion. stop complaining about your differences and be happy you both serve God the almighty. even though you were both exposed to different teaching you both believe in God. He is all knowing, all seeing! if you truly believe in Him He'd appreciate it. that's all you need to do, believe in Him and just do what you know is right.

Don't really know why I put that in...

Toasty-What do you...not agree with about the Mormons?

[Bexie]

It's weird for me to see you guys put that so many of your friends are Christian. Not a single one of mine is. All mine are also athiests. o.O;;; I've never actually met someone at school my own age who's Christian, or if there were, they never said, or just weren't very strong ones. There was a Muslim and a Jehovah's Witness in my class, but everyone else often said in R.E that they didn't believe there was a God in any way, shape or form. For example, my two best friends are about as opposite from Christians as you can get. Once a while ago, my friend Sherrye was happy about something and was looking up at the sky going "oh, thank you, thank you!", and my friend Kita said "What are you thanking that dude for?", and Sherrye very quickly looked down at the ground and started going "Thank you, thank you!" again. o.O;;;

So for me it's quite unusual to see how many of you guys and your friends are Christian, when no one I know (aside from my grandparents) are.

[Toasty]

watch, on Aug 11 2006, 12:01 AM, said:

Don't really know why I put that in...

Toasty-What do you...not agree with about the Mormons?

Well, mainly that the man who started it, and claimed that he was a prophet, was fake. None of his prophecies came true. And the explanation of how he found the morman bible is even harder to believe than some of the stuff in the bible. ( I believe everything in the bible, but some of it is just hard to believe anyway )

Not to put down anyone here who is Morman, but that's just what I believe.

[My Best Wishes]

Mr.T, on Aug 12 2006, 06:04 AM, said:

None of his prophecies came true. And the explanation of how he found the morman bible is even harder to believe than some of the stuff in the bible. ( I believe everything in the bible, but some of it is just hard to believe anyway )

Not to put down anyone here who is Morman, but that's just what I believe.

So...ah, I see it now. The civil war was just a hoax. Man thats a BIG cover up by the government...

And he was lead to the Book of Mormon by an angel. If you believe all that happened in the bible I don't see why you can't believe an angel lead someone to a book written by prophets...

[Enjealousy]

I think maybe this topic should be called Faith and Religion considering religion is the devout practice of philosophical and personal law, while faith is the belief in something without necessarily following every rule perfectly (because we all know that's humanally impossible).

Religion - A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.

Maybe I'm wrong? I don't know...

[Mars Djinni]

watch, on Aug 12 2006, 12:50 AM, said:

So...ah, I see it now. The civil war was just a hoax. Man thats a BIG cover up by the government...

And he was lead to the Book of Mormon by an angel. If you believe all that happened in the bible I don't see why you can't believe an angel lead someone to a book written by prophets...

Lemme add to that.

The fastest growing religion in the world is Islam. How was it founded? An angel came to Mohammed and led him to a cave.

The Bible says that the shepherds were guided by angels to the stable, where a king would be born. A king born in a stable doesn't seem to connect, yet they followed anyway.

How different are those?

[Toasty]

That's not what I'm talking about. He claimed he was a prophet of God, if he was, ALL of his prophecies would have come true. But they didn't. I respect the descision of anyone who is morman, or a member of any other religion. I even have morman friends, I'm just stating one fact.

[Golden Legacy]

Mr.T, on Aug 13 2006, 04:34 PM, said:

That's not what I'm talking about. He claimed he was a prophet of God, if he was, ALL of his prophecies would have come true. But they didn't. I respect the descision of anyone who is morman, or a member of any other religion. I even have morman friends, I'm just stating one fact.

All of whose prophecies? Of Mohammad? All came true. In fact, for Muslims, his wisdom and words (called "Hadith") is the ultimate authority, right after their Holy Book.

You CAN NOT say that a prophet from another religion is false, especially when you aren't even PART of that faith.

[Toasty]

NO. The morman faith. And you can if you study it's history. You don't have to be part of a faith to know something about it, mabey to know all about it. And again, I respect the descision of people and the religion they choose. I'm just stating a fact that I believe.

[Golden Legacy]

I was directing that in general. I see how you thought I was directing that towards you, and I apologize.

Somehow, I just don't think you can ever justify making claims against another religion, no matter how much you may know. It's the same for your culture, when someone pretends to know a lot of the customs and language.

Even then, he or she can't really understand it, or see what makes it tick.

[Toasty]

You're right, you can't unless you're deeply intwined in it. You can know some things about it, but not nearly as much as a member of that religion/race. And I'd like make it clear that I'm not racist against any religion, unless that religion is bent on destroying mine. And I'm not pointing fingers or anything. I respect others descision to be a part of a certain religion, but I won't denounce my beliefs just to make them happy either.

[Mars Djinni]

I am very interested in learning about other religions. I feel it does a lot of good to be building bridges instead of walls, if you know what I mean.

[Toasty]

I agree. Later in your life, those bridges would be much more helpful. But, keep in mind, some bridges you might regret building. But that still shouldn't keep you from building them. Know what I mean?

[Mars Djinni]

I think the bridge connecting the left side of my brain to my right just broke down...

Now that I think about it, theistic religions do have similar structures. A supreme being or a supernatural moral concept working as a ruling power over one's life. Could it be that the creators are seeing the same God, except in the view that is more beleiveable from that part of the world? Are we seeing the one God, but in a different perspective?

I'm sorry if I'm being a little too naive or stupid, even. It's always been a hope of mine that there would be an agreement amongst all religions, a common factor of sorts. Yeah, sure, there are differences, but that's what makes us unique...

When discussing religions and cultures, I want to be as neutral as possible when comparing...

[Toasty]

Some people do think that, but those religions are more different than you think. But don't think that you're naive. I thought that before for a while as well.

[Mars Djinni]

Yeah, you're right. But it is a nice thought, though. I really wish that in the future, the coexistance of religions. For now, I suppose that instead of making all religions fit together, it'd be a lot easier to respect them and learn from them.

[My Best Wishes]

Little late but:

1. Its MormOn.
2. All the prohicies did come true, otherwise there would'nt be a religion where he was the first, prohept, seer and revalator.

[Toasty]

I'm sorry, but they didn't. He said that in this one war/debate/something (it was so long ago that I learned this that I can't remember it all), that this one side would win, but it lost. It also had something to do with religion, and he said that he prophesized that side winning. And there are people who will believe something no matter how obvious it is that it's not true. I'm not calling you ignorant, infact, I didn't know much about it until summer last year when I went on a Christian camp retreat for a few days with my church. No one there would lie, and everything they preached or told, they did extensive research on. You can believe in the Mormon religion, I'm fine with that. I just want you to know how it started.

[My Best Wishes]

Mr.T, on Aug 14 2006, 06:37 PM, said:

I just want you to know how it started.

I am trying hard to make this not sound like a flame. But, I think I know about my religion. (In comment to your quote)

I'll try to find some things he prophesized about.

[Golden Legacy]

Mars Djinni, on Aug 13 2006, 10:55 PM, said:

I think the bridge connecting the left side of my brain to my right just broke down...

Now that I think about it, theistic religions do have similar structures. A supreme being or a supernatural moral concept working as a ruling power over one's life. Could it be that the creators are seeing the same God, except in the view that is more beleiveable from that part of the world? Are we seeing the one God, but in a different perspective?

I'm sorry if I'm being a little too naive or stupid, even. It's always been a hope of mine that there would be an agreement amongst all religions, a common factor of sorts. Yeah, sure, there are differences, but that's what makes us unique...

When discussing religions and cultures, I want to be as neutral as possible when comparing...

Mr.T, on Aug 13 2006, 11:08 PM, said:

Some people do think that, but those religions are more different than you think. But don't think that you're naive. I thought that before for a while as well.

A very close friend of mine once described religion (especially the monotheisitic faiths) in this manner: religion is like a mountain, and at the very peak is God. Same peak, same God. People view the mountain from the base, and view it from different sides, however. And that leads to differences on what is actually quite the same foundation of faith.

[Toasty]

The three main ones (Christianity, Islam, and Jews) probably could be summed up like that, but I don't think that polytheistic religions could be looking at the same mountain.

[Toasty]

Those are wise words, but some sides of the mountain are jagged cliffs, while others are lush green hilsides. Know what I mean? And I don't think that polytheistic religions can be looking at the same mountain, though.

[Phillip]

I am Muslim, But I nulled on accident. I am sorry. Even though I am Muslim, I believe in Evolution, Reincarnation, Judaism, bits of Christianity, and stuff. But morals don't matter anymore. Governments don't care, governments don't even respect homosexuals! Governments are horrible in telling what religion can do what in their country. But oh well, I am not religious, but I do belong to a religion.

[Mars Djinni]

Mr.T, on Aug 16 2006, 12:16 AM, said:

Those are wise words, but some sides of the mountain are jagged cliffs, while others are lush green hilsides. Know what I mean? And I don't think that polytheistic religions can be looking at the same mountain, though.

Well, if you're pagan Greek, then you'd be looking up Mount Olympus.

Some people's perspective might be that all the marvels in this world cannot be described by one omnipotent being, but several, as it seems that the existance of a certain thing is so concentrated that it takes a whole "god" to make it work (eg. Forethought, Time, The Earth, the Seas, The heavens; Prometheus, Kronos, Gaia, Pontus, Oranos, respectively)

Philip, do you want me to add your vote poll for you?

[Sophia_chan]

I practice Scientology, that should be put up there.

[My Best Wishes]

Phillip, on Aug 23 2006, 05:47 AM, said:

I am Muslim, But I nulled on accident. I am sorry. Even though I am Muslim, I believe in Evolution, Reincarnation, Judaism, bits of Christianity, and stuff. But morals don't matter anymore. Governments don't care, governments don't even respect homosexuals! Governments are horrible in telling what religion can do what in their country. But oh well, I am not religious, but I do belong to a religion.

WTF Morals don't matter anymore. The world hasn't gone to hell yet. Morals was the main reason (Aside from oil) that George Dubya wanted to go to war. "Lets go free the poor irag population from that horrible tyrant."

Sophia_chan - Really. Would you mind explaining a bit about it? I've heard of Christain Science but not Scientology before.

[Sophia_chan]

I'm not the kind of person to talk about my religion, I just wanted people to know what I am.

[Golden Legacy]

Though I have both Muslim and (distant) Christian blood, I practice the former.

[Nosferatu]

Ahh man. Didn't see that "Spiritual but not religous" one.

Anyway, I'm that, but I voted Atheist because it's closest and didn't see that one until after I voted. If a mod could change it, that would be appreciated.

[Golden Legacy]

Spiritual instead of Athiest, got it; all taken care of. Carry on.

[Elliott]

Satanist.
But because I don't enjoy explaining myself to ignorant retards...
http://en.wikipedia....aVeyan_Satanism

But just quickly:
Atheistic philosophy.
No devil / demon / Satan worship.
No spiritual side.
We are our own gods.
Satan is not an entity, merely a symbol.
I do not do rituals or believe in magic.

Please don't be stupid, I don't have the time for stupidity.

[Yuki]

Okay, I'm not one religion. I'm polyspiritual and catholic.

I'm catholic because I do believe that the Catholic/Christian God created the universe.

I'm also polyspiritual because I collect data from other religions like buddhism/taoism/confucianism/and shinto.

It's hard to explain but I just feel that Catholicism is how you live your life, and the other religions are ways of life ._.; I do believe one god created everything but I also follow the belief that there is much more to everything.

I'm probably confusing alot of people right now T.T; sorry.

[Mars Djinni]

Love_Guardian_Yuki, on Aug 23 2006, 03:00 AM, said:

Okay, I'm not one religion. I'm polyspiritual and catholic.

I'm catholic because I do believe that the Catholic/Christian God created the universe.

I'm also polyspiritual because I collect data from other religions like buddhism/taoism/confucianism/and shinto.

It's hard to explain but I just feel that Catholicism is how you live your life, and the other religions are ways of life ._.; I do believe one god created everything but I also follow the belief that there is much more to everything.

I'm probably confusing alot of people right now T.T; sorry.

All those philosophies - Buddhism, Taoism, Confucianism; I really love their sense of morals and ethics. Again, it's the God on the mountain, but instead of seeing a personification, they see enlightenment, paradise, a perfect way to live. Confucianism is a great way to live by, which can be incorporated through etiquette. Respect and Honour are things I like to keep in mind.

[Toasty]

watch, on Aug 22 2006, 02:25 PM, said:

WTF Morals don't matter anymore. The world hasn't gone to hell yet. Morals was the main reason (Aside from oil) that George Dubya wanted to go to war. "Lets go free the poor irag population from that horrible tyrant."

I'd just like to point out that he didn't go to get oil, he only went to war to prevent another 9/11 by stopping the terrorists. But that's for a different topic.

[Platinum Sun]

That's the aspect of religion I like. The way it gives one a virtuous code to live by, and nothing more.

[My Best Wishes]

Mr.T, on Aug 24 2006, 06:28 AM, said:

I'd just like to point out that he didn't go to get oil, he only went to war to prevent another 9/11 by stopping the terrorists. But that's for a different topic.

Read Michael Moore's 'Dude, wheres my country?'

Agatio- What a crock of crap. And you say you have no time for stupidity.

[Toasty]

Watch, I don't care what some biased idiot says. He new the oil costs would skyrocket if he went to war, so why the heck would he go to war for oil? Hmm?

[Eugine]

Bush went to war for legacy, status, all that stuff! Too bad he's still going down like a sub-par US President like WD once said ^^

[Nickelback]

Mr.T, on Aug 24 2006, 09:35 AM, said:

Watch, I don't care what some biased idiot says. He new the oil costs would skyrocket if he went to war, so why the heck would he go to war for oil? Hmm?

Then why did he invade the wrong country?

I belive that it was something like 9 of the 13 or whatever hijackers were of Suadi Araban nationality. Not Iraqi or Afghani.

[Golden Legacy]

And there are a billion other muslims who are in no way responsible for terrorism, and yet people associate them generally with terrorist acts.

[Yuki]

Yeah! I agree with GL, I find that completely unfair. But what can you do, it's in human nature to do that =/

[Toasty]

Unfortunately. That's also what happened to Japanese americans in WW two. But he didn't invade the wrong country. His target was rumored to be in the country he attacked, and just because 9 of the 13 terrorists were of a different nationality, that doesn't mean they couldn't have been in Iraq.

[My Best Wishes]

1. None of the terriosts were Iragi.
2. As soon as the towers were bombed they closed all air travel. Except, Air force one went and picked up select members of the Royal Suadi family. Why? For their safety. But why would these people be threatened, what part could their country, a faithful friend to America do?
3. He went for 'weapons of mass destruction.' Weapons found to this day? NONE. Oil pilffered? ALOT.

[Bexie]

watch, on Aug 29 2006, 07:52 AM, said:

1. None of the terriosts were Iragi.
2. As soon as the towers were bombed they closed all air travel. Except, Air force one went and picked up select members of the Royal Suadi family. Why? For their safety. But why would these people be threatened, what part could their country, a faithful friend to America do?
3. He went for 'weapons of mass destruction.' Weapons found to this day? NONE. Oil pilffered? ALOT.

I believe that the people Air Force One picked up were actually close relatives of Osama bin Laden.

[Mars Djinni]

Discuss this elsewhere. It's going to stray far off topic.

[Bexie]

Random question, but what happened to my Atheiest vote?

[Eugine]

I was wondering the samething. I'll add it back, but I don't know what to remove.

[Mars Djinni]

Ooh. Take one off of "Spiritual, but not Religious."

I remember, Nosferatu's vote change was changed twice.

[Zexion]

I'm a Nihilist :blink:

...

I see a flame coming

[Hotshot101]

Yeah not everyone here is a religion fan. Just stay strong. And as you all know I am christian.

[Elliott]

I dropped the Satanist label a month or so ago. I still think Anton LaVey said a lot of good things, but I don't think it's appropriate to brand myself a Satanist simply because of that. Besides, when I questioned it a little more the entire Church of Satan is a ****ing joke anyway. Just a bunch of misfits parading around in funny little costumes, doing invocations and reciting spells. Lame.

I'd say I'm more or less a nihilist now. I don't see how anything spiritual / supernatural can exist. I don't believe in any gods, afterlife, re-incarnation, and I don't have faith in anything besides myself; because why place trust into something you can't even see / hear / taste / touch / feel, when you can place it into something that you see in the mirror every morning?

Aside from that, I find religion and everything attached to it (adherents, morals etc.) to be the single most damaging entity in the history of the world.

Take away religion completely and we'd still have the twin towers.
And don't give me this bull**** about extremists, if the religion wasn't there in the first place there wouldn't be anything to fuel those people and cause them to commit such heinous acts.

[Hotshot101]

Your still kinda off with religion causing all the terrorists. Sure they may follow the jihad thing, but I don't think it is the only reason.

[Saturos S.]

There are more reasons to hate one another then just religion.

If it didn't exist, sure some things would never had occured, there would be less wars. But people would just find other things to hate each other about.

[Hotshot101]

Religion isn't main cause of wars. That all political junk.

[Saturos S.]

I didn't say that. I said that some wars are caused by religious differences. Most wars are for political reasons.

[Hotshot101]

I am saying religion wouldn't make a difference in how many wars we have.

[Nyktos]

Then you'd be wrong. Although some wars did just use religion as an excuse to attack people you already hate, some truly were fought over religion.

[Hotshot101]

Well the world was chaotic in the period you are refering to.

[Eugine]

Even if there wasn't any religion, man would have found some reason to get power... religion is always just the scape goat.

[Hotshot101]

Man has always been that way and always will be. Nothing can change that.

[Elliott]

Hotshot101, on Jan 18 2007, 09:58 AM, said:

Well the world was chaotic in the period you are refering to.

And it's not chaotic at the moment?
Not everywhere is like your cozy little American town you know?
Just walk down any slummy area or visit a third-world country.
Not exactly paradise is it?

Quote

Your still kinda off with religion causing all the terrorists. Sure they may follow the jihad thing, but I don't think it is the only reason.

You don't seem to understand what I said.
"World minus religion equals no religious extremists equals Twin Towers still standing."

[Hotshot101]

Hmm no I still dout that, because even terrorists don't attack for a petty fight. I do believe we did something.

[Elliott]

Hotshot101, on Jan 18 2007, 11:36 AM, said:

Hmm no I still dout that, because even terrorists don't attack for a petty fight. I do believe we did something.

Man, you really are dense.

They were religious extremists right? Take away the religion, and there wouldn't be religious extremists in the first place. Sure, you would probably then get extremists of other sorts; political, ideological and whatnot etc. But at least then their actions wouldn't be based on blind faith and ancient texts, they would be based upon conflicting political views, political oppression etc. I know it's hard tog et your head around this being a religious person, but religion does much more harm than good.

[Hotshot101]

Problem is with your theory is that the jihad was dropped awhile back. Whether they keep it or not. I don't know and neith do you.

[Golden Legacy]

Now, I'm religious, but I am going to agree with Agatio on one thing; because religion, for most people, is a staple in life... because religion is something that people are devoutly loyal to, it correspondingly yields GREATER risks in the form of extremists.

Agatio isn't saying that religion alone creates extremism. He isn't saying that the purpose of religion creates extremism. Extremists always exist; however, religion seems to "raise the bar", so to speak. In that sense, the few extremists that do result from religion have the capability, and capacity, to be MUCH more dangerous.

[gsninja]

I'm a Christian-Catholic. I'm not that religious, but religious enough.

Agatio, I do partly agree with you that religion does more harm than good. There are some martyrs, etc. who would do anything to die for their religion. It's probably just for the fact of conflicting morals and whatnot. Thing is, religion is what gives a lot of people hope in their lives. The fact is, some people should just learn to control their emotions in the right way.

Something that rather annoys me is how much abuse the Catholic Church receives. Sure, even I admit, it has been a bit screwed up for a long time, and it has somewhat gotten worse. This doesn't mean the Catholic Church is bad overall, though. Even though there are reports of priests molesting kids, or really dumb decisions the Church makes, it shouldn't necessarily receive as much abuse as it does now.

[Elliott]

Hotshot101, on Jan 18 2007, 12:32 PM, said:

Problem is with your theory is that the jihad was dropped awhile back. Whether they keep it or not. I don't know and neith do you.

Seriously man, pay more attention in English class. Half of the posts you make are too hard to decipher so I just ignore them. Practice getting your point across effectively, until then I don't really have time to debate with you.

[Hotshot101]

GL:In a sense. The purpose of religion is to find truth. If that creates extremists then, they are wacked. If any reason it is that they think that there religion is true and they think they can force it on others, which is wrong. Some parts of religion are bad, some are good. Just depends on how you look at it.

Agatio: if your just going to talk about my english then go somewhere else. If you want to know my point. It is that Islamic religion (which are the terrorists religion) dropped there belief in having jihads (which is holy wars). Therefore you do not know that if the terrorists keep this pillar of Islam and therefor you do not know if this is the cause of the terrorists. Get it?


Gsninja: This sorta agrees with old Islamics. If they die facing there enemy they would go to heaven. This is why they don't fear death. Which is why they are willing to blow themselves up.

[Zexion]

Hotshot101, on Jan 17 2007, 09:25 PM, said:

The purpose of religion is to find truth. If that creates extremists then, they are wacked.

Actually, the main purpose of religion is to help overcoming the fear of death and encouraging a set of morality. As each religion are different, its version of morality varies, the result would be conflicts in which is superior, and creating extremists in the process.

[Golden Legacy]

Hotshot101, on Jan 17 2007, 10:25 PM, said:

Agatio: if your just going to talk about my english then go somewhere else. If you want to know my point. It is that Islamic religion (which are the terrorists religion) dropped there belief in having jihads (which is holy wars). Therefore you do not know that if the terrorists keep this pillar of Islam and therefor you do not know if this is the cause of the terrorists. Get it?

I want you to elaborate on this more. Are you saying that terrorists/jihadists don't reflect the actual nature of the religion? That they misinterpret it?

[Nyktos]

Yes, I believe that is what he was saying.

[Hotshot101]

Golden Legacy, on Jan 18 2007, 07:29 PM, said:

I want you to elaborate on this more. Are you saying that terrorists/jihadists don't reflect the actual nature of the religion? That they misinterpret it?

I am not saying that. I am saying that the Islamics dropped the pillar. If they didn't we would have muslim countries going outta control attack everywhere. So these terrorists may have kept the pillar or they may not have. You just don't know until, you find out the reason for yourself.

[Golden Legacy]

... You're slowly making less and less sense. Define what you mean by "pillar".

[Xelina]

Maybe he means the pillers to uphold the religion's mortal? Or discrib the sanity of their memeber? Or maybe a flood gate of emotions breaking down?

Or does he refers to the 5 pillers of faith which they worship?

However, above all, As Zexion stated before Religion is there to help humans to coup with death, and really all of which are unknown. Human fear the unknown, so they create stories, tales, fables, to help not only to uphold their mortality but also to over came in which we all fear, the unknown.

And sadlly the conflect it created with it... it is real, and painful. This world is a painful world which is filled with stubborn people who suggested only their religion is real and all others are fake. Thus conflict breaks out, and the flood gate is let loose into bloody violence. Within this mess of Chaos, exremtist, usually the leader, and other money wanting mens, the under hanchmens, takes advantage of this choas and creat organization to terrorize and supress people who they believe are to be the 'sinners'.

That is what I believe to be the root cause, though I present no other solution then a silly old negosation. Which I doubt it is going to end a massive religious war.

[Golden Legacy]

Xelina, on Jan 19 2007, 12:30 AM, said:

Maybe he means the pillers to uphold the religion's mortal? Or discrib the sanity of their memeber? Or maybe a flood gate of emotions breaking down?

Or does he refers to the 5 pillers of faith which they worship?

However, above all, As Zexion stated before Religion is there to help humans to coup with death, and really all of which are unknown. Human fear the unknown, so they create stories, tales, fables, to help not only to uphold their mortality but also to over came in which we all fear, the unknown.

And sadlly the conflect it created with it... it is real, and painful. This world is a painful world which is filled with stubborn people who suggested only their religion is real and all others are fake. Thus conflict breaks out, and the flood gate is let loose into bloody violence. Within this mess of Chaos, exremtist, usually the leader, and other money wanting mens, the under hanchmens, takes advantage of this choas and creat organization to terrorize and supress people who they believe are to be the 'sinners'.

That is what I believe to be the root cause, though I present no other solution then a silly old negosation. Which I doubt it is going to end a massive religious war.

I'm absolutely impressed! You're looking to be a very solid member.

Religion is there for guidance and support. Tell me, are atheists content in knowing that they will just die and decay in the ground, where all their past deeds will go unaccounted for? Do you really just want to fade from obscurity? What's the incentive for there to be even good or bad if we're to inevitably die, with all our past actions not taken into account?

Bah. I'm too tired to debate this fully. I'll come tomorrow with a stronger argument.

[Zexion]

There are 3 types of religious beliefs:

Monotheist - The belief of a single god
Polytheist - The belief of many gods
Atheist - The belief of no god(s)

As I said above, the meaning of Atheist is simply someone who do not worship a god, not that they are not religious. We do have religions who do not worship god(s), buddhism for example is one of them(as buddha is not considered a god), it is a religion, but it is also atheist.

[Xelina]

I don't believe all atheists are content with being buried to the ground like animals. Maybe some are, but as for me, being a Chirstian in name only, I believe that they choice of not believeing in one religion keeps them more open minded then other people. True, this does not go along with every one of them, but I do tend to find more open minded people among them then any other group. They seems more indepent too. With their own set of believes and mortals set in stones, and not be 'brain-washed' in believing in one side of the story. Rather, they do at times tend to see more of a whole picture then most people.

However, upon death, the believe they are just as fearful of deaths as the religious people are, though they do tend to see it as a more light hearted matter. I think they are just content with being alive, and is able to live. Remember the old saying 'Live every day like your last'? I believe that most of the atheists are living it that way. They fellow their own instect, believe in their own rules, and overall, believe in themselves rather, then something super natural. For that I amired them, for being able to stand up to their own believes in this cold and cruel world.

[gsninja]

That's right. The thing I envy about aetheists is that they aren't bound by a strict decree like the other religions. They basically follow their lives through self-reliance in their own rules and regulations, then set their path. I think that's awesome, and it's why aetheists are so unique.
Still, when you belong to a certain religion that believes in a God, a lot of life's mysteries make a lot of sense.

[Elliott]

gsninja, on Jan 19 2007, 04:05 PM, said:

That's right. The thing I envy about aetheists is that they aren't bound by a strict decree like the other religions. They basically follow their lives through self-reliance in their own rules and regulations, then set their path. I think that's awesome, and it's why aetheists are so unique.
Still, when you belong to a certain religion that believes in a God, a lot of life's mysteries make a lot of sense.

That's pretty pathetic. You will envy Atheists, say they are unique, and then continue to blindly follow your religion because you want a few of life's irrelevant mysteries to make sense. That just goes to show how deep-seeded indoctrination can completely brainwash someone. Is how the world began and what is beyond death so important? Why bother with the beginning and with death when you can direct your efforts to the present?

[Xelina]

Though some people amire the atheists, they might not become atheists. Many people amire a lot of famous people, but do not wish to become say such person. After that is what Religion is about, knowelege and faith. You shouldn't call people pathaic for amiring one thing but believes in another. People does it all the time, and it is quite natural. After all, do you really want to give up all that which you have for the unknown? Not a not of people would answer yes, because after all, we do fear which is not known to us.

[Zexion]

Agatio, on Jan 19 2007, 12:12 AM, said:

That's pretty pathetic. You will envy Atheists, say they are unique, and then continue to blindly follow your religion because you want a few of life's irrelevant mysteries to make sense. That just goes to show how deep-seeded indoctrination can completely brainwash someone. Is how the world began and what is beyond death so important? Why bother with the beginning and with death when you can direct your efforts to the present?

Not everyone are as...uh...secure as you are, it's human nature to be curious. Some of them'll need something to fall back on, this way, no matter what happens they can always go back to the safety of their religion.

[Elliott]

Since when has religion been about safety or having something to fall back on? Isn't it about complete dedication of your life to that religion? Isn't it about devout believing and 100% faith? When religion because just something that you're a part of because you feel obligated to be a part of it, or because it's some kind of safe haven, the the original meaning of religion is lost. As far as I'm concerned, you either dedicate your life to that religion, or you don't even bother. That's why I stopped calling myself a Christian a few years back. Sure, I went to church and a Christian school, and felt that was the right thing to do, but when I actually questioned my faith, I realised that I wasn't a Christian at all, and immediately stopped calling myself one and going to church etc.

[Zexion]

And why do they dedicate their life to it? I find the Holy Bible to be an interpreted fantasy book, that which tells stories of the ancient times. Its liability is not guaranteed to be 100% true, but they follow it anyway. Why is that?

Simple, Because they are weak of the mind and naturally, the mass requires some sort of leader to guide them. They are insecure and requires confirmation that no-matter what happens, they can always come back to their safety of religion.

[Xelina]

Yes, you did do what others won't have done, but you know, not everyone is like you. Not everyone is as sure as you, so I don't think it is right to call those people 'pathaic' for just unable to make up their minds about one thing. This religion is a big deal for most people, and it does take great consideration for people to move from one religen to another. No only they are facing an unknown, but they are also facing something that even might go against what they have believed before. No everything is black and white nore they are cut and dry, because just you made up your mind like that, it doesn't mean others will be the same.

[Ravenblade]

Zexion, on Jan 19 2007, 05:36 AM, said:

And why do they dedicate their life to it? I find the Holy Bible to be an interpreted fantasy book, that which tells stories of the ancient times. Its liability is not guaranteed to be 100% true, but they follow it anyway. Why is that?

Simple, Because they are weak of the mind and naturally, the mass requires some sort of leader to guide them. They are insecure and requires confirmation that no-matter what happens, they can always come back to their safety of religion.

The foremost display of arrogance along the lines of "religion is for the weak of mind" would be the fact that, if as you say religion is a controlling mechanism, set down by higher powers to consolidate their positions, or simply to provide safety, is it not percievable that we contemporary human beings are just as blind to the controlling mechanisms we employ on ourselves (innate moral code? - no, no such thing if there's no God -Ask Nietzsche) or the codes that our leaders use to maintain their influence over us (democracy).

If there is no God, then all the atrocities committed throughout human existence, whether in Gods name or not, are all MANS fault. Personally, i see little difference, and certainly nothing positive, in moving from a control where I am effectively answerable to *my* conscience in the form of God (whether It exists or not - i base my moral code on the New Testament, i believe the OT to be symbolic) to one where im answerable to a society that allows mass killings, wars, raping and discrimination (Im referring to global society here).

As a final point, for those delusional enough to think that the world would be a conflict free place without religion, get real. Religion is an excuse for those in power to go to war, not a reason. If you take religion away, they WILL find other reasons. To be honest, they already have - WMDs and "Humanitarian Intervention". Religion isnt the problem, people are.

Im sorry to say that it is out of despair at mankind that i turn to religion for some small hope that maybe, just maybe we wont have annihilated ourselves by 2100.

[Elliott]

Ravenblade, on Jan 19 2007, 09:43 PM, said:

The foremost display of arrogance along the lines of "religion is for the weak of mind" would be the fact that, if as you say religion is a controlling mechanism, set down by higher powers to consolidate their positions, or simply to provide safety, is it not percievable that we contemporary human beings are just as blind to the controlling mechanisms we employ on ourselves (innate moral code? - no, no such thing if there's no God -Ask Nietzsche) or the codes that our leaders use to maintain their influence over us (democracy).

If there is no God, then all the atrocities committed throughout human existence, whether in Gods name or not, are all MANS fault. Personally, i see little difference, and certainly nothing positive, in moving from a control where I am effectively answerable to *my* conscience in the form of God (whether It exists or not - i base my moral code on the New Testament, i believe the OT to be symbolic) to one where im answerable to a society that allows mass killings, wars, raping and discrimination (Im referring to global society here).

As a final point, for those delusional enough to think that the world would be a conflict free place without religion, get real. Religion is an excuse for those in power to go to war, not a reason. If you take religion away, they WILL find other reasons. To be honest, they already have - WMDs and "Humanitarian Intervention". Religion isnt the problem, people are.

Im sorry to say that it is out of despair at mankind that i turn to religion for some small hope that maybe, just maybe we wont have annihilated ourselves by 2100.

Humanity is the biggest problem, and of course without religion there would still be conflict and atrocities, but at least then they wouldn't be based on ancient scriptures and interpreted fantasies. I think that yes, Atheists have done as much damage to this world as the religious adherents, but they weren't fueled by blind belief and religious indoctrination. The Atheists were spurred to commit such acts for political reasons, or for ideological differences (i.e. Hitler, Stalin etc.).

To quote Bill Hicks "We are a virus with shoes". Mankind is essentially a disgusting and vile entity when you really think about it. Even taking religion out of the equation, people have still done so much destruction and detrimental acts throughout history. That's just the way people are. We're selfish, ignorant, stupid, belligerent pieces of human waste when you really sit back and think about it. That's something that we all have to live and deal with everyday, and no amount of religion can change that.

But why is it necessary to turn to religion for comfort and hope? I still haven't seen a straight answer yet. Why is it so damn important to have some explanation of what is beyond death, and the origins of the universe? Personally, I find the origins of the universe completely irrelevant in the present day. Whether God exists and created the universe, whether the big bang occurred and evolution followed, or whether the two are somehow intertwined is completely unimportant to me, and won’t really help me in anyway way either now or in the future. As for what happens beyond death, I suppose I'll know that when I get there, won't I? Why is it necessary to fabricate a theory now? How is knowing what is beyond death going to affect me today?

Then lastly, there is the moral aspects attached to religion, and even those don't require religion. I can still be a 'good' person by society's standards without religion. I could be an upstanding man with a lot of decency and integrity without going to church every Sunday.

Taking all that into consideration, why is it still necessary to be religious?

[Hotshot101]

Golden Legacy, on Jan 18 2007, 10:48 PM, said:

... You're slowly making less and less sense. Define what you mean by "pillar".

The 5 pillars of Islam. These are basically there 5 main daily things you have to do.

[Xelina]

To gain a firm ground upon the shaking world? To have something to fall back on? To gain a fantasy away from the reality?

No one really knows what or why religion exisit. Some say that it exisit because of truth, other say it is nothing but supersitions. Really, it doesn't matter, religion is somthing you pore your faith with. Something to think about, and somthing to explain the supernaturals of the world. Somthing to make human kind looking FORWARD to death. Something to reasure us in the time of need. It doesn't need a reason to exisit. It exisit because people, humans, needs it. It doesn't exisit because it is the truth, it doesn't exisit because people like to tell stories. It exists because humans feel isolated without it. So to shed some of the isolation off, something or someone created it, bounding people togather, give people a thing to weep and rejoyce about. It's sole purpose in existence is because, us humans needs it.

[Hotshot101]

Also know one knows if it is true or not. Nothing anyone says can absolutly prove religion wrong.

[Golden Legacy]

Hotshot101, on Jan 19 2007, 10:42 AM, said:

The 5 pillars of Islam. These are basically there 5 main daily things you have to do.

Yes, I'm well aware. I myself am Muslim. The way you presented it, however, is wrong. Jihad is not obligated, and it certainly is not a basic belief of the religion.

[gsninja]

As I said before, I'm not that religious. Sure, I'm a Catholic, but I'm not a Catholic who's dedicated and will, possibly, take more things about the religion to be true. The main reason I'm a Catholic is because, since I was born one, I feel obligated to stay one. I don't set my morals along the lines of the Bible or anything, though, only along the lines of my own thoughts.

You can never, ever be sure of anything when it comes to life, death, and religion. I don't really plan to take everything I hear about them to be 100%. Religion is in the worl because there are people that need hope.

Also, saying I envy aetheists was probably quite the wrong way of saying what I was trying to express. XD Anywho, Agatio, I never said I followed my religion simply because some of life's mysteries make more sense. I said religion IN GENERAL makes life's mysteries sound more sensible, and that's what I'm saying because everything else, including science, makes less sense. I'm never going to take anything of it to be completely true, though, becuase none of us lived in the past. In that case, we can never know.

[Golden Legacy]

Agatio, I don't necessarily think that you believe religion is a problem - maybe it's how they're conducted, maybe it's the different traditions and beliefs of Christianity, Islam, Judaism - those distinctions that leave you doubtful?

[Hotshot101]

Golden Legacy, on Jan 19 2007, 08:28 PM, said:

Yes, I'm well aware. I myself am Muslim. The way you presented it, however, is wrong. Jihad is not obligated, and it certainly is not a basic belief of the religion.

Ah. been a couple month since I read up on this, probaly forgot it already.

[Elliott]

I despise all religion, for all the reasons I have mentioned thus far.

[Zexion]

Hotshot101, on Jan 19 2007, 06:49 PM, said:

Also know one knows if it is true or not. Nothing anyone says can absolutly prove religion wrong.

WHAT are you talking about?

Many religion consists of many obvious flaws, there are no perfect religion, and even if there is it'll get corrupted by it's very associates like the rest of the religions.

The only thing no one can absolutly prove is wheither your holy dude exist or not.

[My Best Wishes]

I am so sick of the arguement 'Prove it'. It's faith for a reason!

[Zexion]

I'm a nilhilist, I don't have your so call faith, if it does not mix with reasons.

[Golden Legacy]

What I find interesting is that this topic isn't actually about religion, it's basically a whole debate between religion and atheism.

I was curious, simply because while that debate is worth having, it's also worth noting that there are differences between religions too.

[Toasty]

Well I have at least some proof that my god exists, though most of you won't understand it at all, or will try to make an excuse to why it would happen. Either way, here goes.

The way scientists have determined how old rocks are, is by studying their radiohalos. This is a link to a website which describes what they are. But my point is, is that scientists have found pulonium radiohalos frozen in rocks. By the laws of science, they should not exist. A pulonium radiohalo, normally, is only supposed to exist fo a second or so during the quick proscess of deterioration which takes place in a radiohalo. For example, the radiohalo might start out as a plutonium radiohalo, and eventually deteriorate into a neptunium radiohalo, then einstinium, and so on until it stops deteriorating. Though that is just an example. Pulonium radiohalos only exist in the middle of that. It's like flash freezing a glass of water which is fizzing with alkeselzer (sp?). Unless you freeze it extremely fast, you won't preserve any of the bubles. Well, in this case, the rock was cooled extremely fast. Faster than anything that can be explained by nature. Basically, it's a miracle. But by uniformitarian laws, anything that happens is explainable by the laws of nature, and no god, or miracles exist. Well, this isn't explainable by the laws of nature, so thus is a miracle. Since it is a miracle, some God must exist for this to have taken place.

So did any of you understand that?

[Zexion]

Thank you for the "it-must-be-god-because-we-can't-explain-it" theory, now it's my turn to state my point.

The only problem with god is that his existence curses him, he's supposed to be omnipresent and omnipotent, existing throughout all time and space, matter and antimatter to become the alpha and omega of everything that exists on a phsical plane and a spiritual plane, as a result his capability to exist throughout all time and everywhere would take an expanded consciousness powerful enough to create and master everything thus becoming truly all powerful. But if thats the case, then we also have to consider several scientific theories. for example. The grandfather theory. its a theory tat goes with the assumption that time travel is possible, as is the capability to exist throughout all time, like god. the basic theory is that if youy were to go back in time and kill one of your grandparents at birth, then you would not exist because your grandparent never reporduced, never created one of your parent who never reproduced who therefore never made you. but if you never existed then you can't have killed your grandfather so he did reproduce so you did exist, but if you existed then you killed him. and so on and so forth.

if thats the case, then travelling forwadrd or backwards through time is impossible because the paradoxes created throughout the timeline would end up becoming random and varied, assuming the timeline could fix itself then there'd still be major repurcussions in the paradox of the stabby-grandad.

so the theory continues to state that assuming that paradoxes are so easy to create and life itself creates fluctuations in the timeline provided you went into the past then the timeline would already be incredibly unstable because time travel is apparantely possible and at some point in the future humans have mastered it, but that doens't matter because they already travelled to the past and therefore everything is already screwy. since its not, the only other possibility is that instead of trvalling forward or backwards, you travel sideways.

to exist in a parralel universe in a different time would have no repurcussions in our own time, nor none in the destination world for the simple fact that your grandfather in another universe who created your other-univsrse parent hasn't created you in your universe, therefore killing the grandfather has no repurcissoons whatsoever except maybe a little jail time.

assuming that any of that is correct, then god not only has to exist throughout all time and space known in this universe, but in others too. this will obviously get massively complicated for every alternate universe there is, assuming of course that they do exist and assuming that all this is possible even from the start.

now, that aside, it'd mean that god, either through his own omniprecense or through these multiple iniverses, can see things that, in our time, have already happened, the same goses for any point in hostory whatsoever. assuming that any of this is possible then god should've been capable of seein,g at the exact moment he told adam and even not to take the fruit of knowledge, eve being tempted by the serpent and giving in.

if god is capable of seeing every and all outcomes for all actions whether past, present or future, actions and decisions made by the most insignificnt of slaves in egypt to the emperor of mars or whatever in the future then what nee is there for god at all? assuming he can see all this, then free will by definition is destroyed because free will by dfeinition allows us, regular people, to control absolutely everything in a god-like way, deciding when, how and if anything and everything will happen.

if god is flawless, then his existence itself is flawed because despite the fact he created the commandments, told eve not to take the fruit, told the pharoh to release the slaves and everything else god told people to do, he could already see that they wouldn't. thus his purpose is erased because he no longer needs to judge, all action, reaction, consequence and purpose are displayed before him and with his expanded consciousness he can view it all at once without moving. since judgement isn';t neceesary, and free will is nonexistant, then everybody who ever lived and who ever will live is already destined to go to heaven or hell as per their actions.

if god has no purpose, then why does he exist? if gods purpose was to judge and oversee but that duty is now gone then why should ne need to exist at all?

the simple fact is that when you consider all this information collectively, god couldn't exist in the first place simply because his existence creates flaws in himself, if he has judged and rules and left an impression on what earh should be, and what humanity should act like, and yet continuing and increasing forsakening of his name, teachings etc then his work was all a waste and we as a species are doomed to rot in hell for all eternity.

since I'm pretty sure one of the popes said that a flawed god cannot be the real god, thus refuting gods like allah (teaches extensive vengeance and anger against all who do not follow his ways) and basically every other od there is, then the christian god mut be the only god, but if the christian god's existence creates flaws in itself then he casn't exist either.

To put it simply, theres no evidence to suggest that god exists per se, but theres a lot of theoretical evidence to suggest that he doesn't, but since theoritical evidence can't be proven at the time its the same as having no evidence.

either way we lose.

[Toasty]

In heaven (where god is) there is no time. So for those who will go to heaven, regardless of when we died, we will have arrived in heaven at the same time. Time travel is impossible, and always will be. So don't even go there. God is capable of seeing every and all outcomes, yes, but he doesn't govern our actions. He merely knows what we are going to do, before we do it. Christianity teaches that those who truly believe in god, will go to heaven. No good deeds or other tasks required. You just have to believe. God has a purpose. His purpouse is to guide us when we ask for his help, and to show us how to get to heaven should we ask him. He may already know who will go to hell and who will go to heaven, but he doesn't decide, we do. We decide whether we will go to heaven or hell. It's our choice. The gates are wide open, we just have to choose which path to take. I don't know why we were created, but that's because I don't study the bible day in and day out like my youth pastor does.

Pick up a bible and read the whole thing. It'll answer your questions about god and christianity.

[Elliott]

Mr.T, on Jan 22 2007, 10:04 AM, said:

In heaven (where god is) there is no time. So for those who will go to heaven, regardless of when we died, we will have arrived in heaven at the same time. Time travel is impossible, and always will be.

I think it's extremely amusing that you would say that God and Heaven exist in the same sentence with no proof whatsoever to back it up, and then go on to say that time travel is impossible and always will be, when there is at least some scientific theory behind time travel. It really goes to show how ignorant Christians are. You can dismiss a scientific theory, but you can believe in another dimension called Heaven that houses the creator of the universe.

Zexion, on Jan 22 2007, 09:47 AM, said:

if god is flawless, then his existence itself is flawed because despite the fact he created the commandments, told eve not to take the fruit, told the pharoh to release the slaves and everything else god told people to do, he could already see that they wouldn't. thus his purpose is erased because he no longer needs to judge, all action, reaction, consequence and purpose are displayed before him and with his expanded consciousness he can view it all at once without moving. since judgement isn';t neceesary, and free will is nonexistant, then everybody who ever lived and who ever will live is already destined to go to heaven or hell as per their actions.

That's a great paragraph, it really make a lot of sense. Well done.

Mr.T, on Jan 22 2007, 09:40 AM, said:

Well I have at least some proof that my god exists, though most of you won't understand it at all, or will try to make an excuse to why it would happen. Either way, here goes.

The way scientists have determined how old rocks are, is by studying their radiohalos. This is a link to a website which describes what they are. But my point is, is that scientists have found pulonium radiohalos frozen in rocks. By the laws of science, they should not exist.

What you don't seem to understand is that the laws of science have the advantage of being able to expand and explain more and more things as time goes on, whereas your so called 'god' is bound to be forever constant and never change. The Judeo-Christian god is bound by the laws of science, the laws of science are bound by absolutely nothing. As research continues and more discoveries are made, the laws of science can be changed to accommodate such things.

watch, on Jan 21 2007, 02:08 PM, said:

I am so sick of the arguement 'Prove it'. It's faith for a reason!

But then the argument becomes 'why does one need faith', which has so far only been answered with 'because it provides comfort, safety, and something to fall back on'. To which I reply: Why are these things necessary? Why fall back in religion, when you can rely on yourself?

[Toasty]

Yes, we can, and no, we aren't ignorant. The only scientific proof behind time travel, is that it's theoretically possible to use a telescope to see what the outer rim of the universe looked like billions of years ago, since the light produced from that period would just be arriving at our door step, while what is really happening won't be visible for another billion years. No time travel, just the ability to see into the past. And at that, you won't even be able to see into earth's past. I can believe that god and heaven exist, because there's already proof to back it up. All of the prophecies in the bible have come true so far. Every single last one. Personally, I don't see how that's possible unless some all powerful being predicted them. The being, being God. On top of that, there's more proof in that post I made about radiohalos, the fact that Noah's arc has been found, the dead sea scrols, and a whole lot of other archeological finds and scientific discoveries.

Now give me one piece of evidence that proves that god doesn't exist. I'd like to see you find just one article that has solid proof that he doesn't exist. Because I've looked incredibly hard myself, and haven't found a thing.

[Elliott]

Mr.T, on Jan 22 2007, 06:13 PM, said:

Yes, we can, and no, we aren't ignorant. The only scientific proof behind time travel, is that it's theoretically possible to use a telescope to see what the outer rim of the universe looked like billions of years ago, since the light produced from that period would just be arriving at our door step, while what is really happening won't be visible for another billion years. No time travel, just the ability to see into the past. And at that, you won't even be able to see into earth's past. I can believe that god and heaven exist, because there's already proof to back it up. All of the prophecies in the bible have come true so far. Every single last one. Personally, I don't see how that's possible unless some all powerful being predicted them. The being, being God. On top of that, there's more proof in that post I made about radiohalos, the fact that Noah's arc has been found, the dead sea scrols, and a whole lot of other archeological finds and scientific discoveries.

Now give me one piece of evidence that proves that god doesn't exist. I'd like to see you find just one article that has solid proof that he doesn't exist. Because I've looked incredibly hard myself, and haven't found a thing.

Please show me some of these prophecies that came true. I'm fairly certain they will all be extremely vague.

I never said there was scientific proof of time travel, I just said that there is at least some scientific theory behind it, as opposed to the existence of God which is, as far as I'm concerned, something people made up a few long time ago to offer them comfort regarding death.

Also, show me images of Noah's arc, and tell me where it was found. If it wasn't found somewhere around the middle east, then it can't really be Noah's can it? He couldn't have traveled very far in 40 days without even having sails, could he?

The dead sea scrolls are just old versions of the bible. They don't prove that God exists, only that Christians existed 2000 years ago, which everyone knew anyway.

List these archaeological finds and discoveries please, I'm interested to see how they can prove the existence of a supernatural deity.

Furthermore, if you know for a fact he exists, then where does faith come into the equation? Isn't it necessary to have faith in Jesus in order to get into Heaven?

[Toasty]

Yes, you do need faith. People can be presented with all this evidence, but it takes faith to believe that he exists. The evidence proves that miracles have happened, and that predictions were made and came true. There is no way to say that he exists for sure, there are no pictures of him or sightings (except for his son 2000 years ago). But there aslo is no evidence to suggest he doesn't. Even though there is evidence to suggest he's real, and none to suggest he isn't, more people choose to believe he doesn't, simply because they can't fathome it. That is why faith is needed.

About Noah's arc. Here. I know very well that it states "Even if Noah's Ark is Not Proven, Noah's Ark still could have landed on Mount Ararat." That only means, that if Noah's Ark is real, then Mt. Ararat is the most likely place for it to have landed. The Ark was built in that general area (around the mediteranian), remanants of a huge vessel (an Ark sized vessel) have been found there, and the height of the mountain all suggest that it landed there.

About the prophecies, there are about 300 of them. None of which are the least bit vague. One in particular, predicts Christ's crucifixion. The prophecy dates back to 1017 B.C. and predicts that a man in the house of
David (Jesus) will have his hands and feet pierced (i.e. he will be crucified). This prophecy was written 800 years before the Romans even started crucifixions. This is just an outline of the prophecy, though. For the actual refrence, read Psalm 22: 6-18. It is a poem written by king David in 1017 B.C. (who really did exist, and not just because the bible said so). On a side note, every person on this planet can be traced back to three men, Shem, Ham, and Japheth. These are Noah's three sons. A prophecy said that Jesus would be a decendant of Shem. Turns out, he was (according to the bible). That prophecy was made around 1440 B.C., a good 1400 years before Jesus was even born.

As for archeological and scientific proof, the archeological proof is Noah's arc in Mt. Ararat, and the scientific is the radiohalos I talked about earlier. There are others, though, besides them.

A good refrence for you, is "More than a carpenter," a book written by Josh McDowell who is a former atheist. It lists ten points which suggest God exists. He was previously studying Christianity to prove that it was a hoax. He had written a book 2 inches thick about his findings. Now, he's a Christian preacher.

[Ravenblade]

As soon as science can come up with an even remotely plausible reason for the universe's existence in the first place, maybe some genuine counter argument to God will occur. And for the record, i do believe the Big Bang Theory, i just dont quite get how science can go "And there was this very dense piece of rock, and it was just...y'know...there, and it exploded and then we were made" and expect everyone to be satisfied with that. Why would any matter in the universe etc actually exist (Referring to why the thing that cuased the big bang existed).

I mean come one, really force yourselves on this one, why in the damn hell does anything exist without ~something~ that could have started it all. Stuff cant just *appear* without something making it do so. Science is never going to get itself around this one, and so therefore fails in its attempt to solve the riddles of the universe. If it cant solve such riddles, why exactly should i assume it's right..?

@ Zexion - all valid arguments - have they changed why belief at all? No. Why? Cos if i was God, i probably woulda done something like that too, even knowing that we'd all turn out like this. I mean for all we know, there very genuinely could be some higher purpose to all of this. Just to throw one up in the air at you, however implausible, maybe God is doing this so that the universe will reach a point where it doesnt need him and then he can cease to exist? I mean, its a ridiculous theory, but hell, you dont know its not the case do you? Furthermore, its entirely possible it could be something that we dont have any concept of, and therefore no possible way of dreaming up or explaining.

@Agatio - There probably isnt any real need for religion in all honesty - i mean, i guess as an insitution it exists to give people guidance in their faith and such - some people stick to it very rigidly, some dont. I havent been to church for a couple of years (Apart from Christmas) and i get along ok. For me, i turn to religion cos i tried not believing in it (earnestly) and..i dunno, i wasnt as happy a person - i felt down, things kept defeating me. I felt kinda pointless. I mean...Im not especially enamoured with the idea that im just another link in the evolutionary chain - basically, i perform better when i have a religion that gives me an overall sense purpose (Never heard a satisfactory argument from an atheist providing me with a purpose for their existence. Never - "To be happy/ for the species/experiences/dunno - all dont work for me). That being the case, i accept that my belief could be wrong - but frankly, if i found out today, that there was irrefutable proof that God doesnt exist, i would continue believing in Him. Its part of who I am, and its what makes me stronger than most other people around me.

Why should i give that up? Even if its not real? Cos its delusional perhaps..? The reality we live in is all one big delusion - money/love/fame - its all a lie but we believe in it anyway.

If people are so certain God doesnt exist, why do they spend so much time trying to prove it? Are you trying to save those of us who do? I doubt it, and we can do without it thanks. I actually believe people do it so they can justify their own beliefs to themselves.

[Hotshot101]

Ravenblade, on Jan 22 2007, 07:00 AM, said:

If people are so certain God doesnt exist, why do they spend so much time trying to prove it? Are you trying to save those of us who do?

Pretty much that is exactly what all religions do. We all believe are religion is true, so we try to save others. It gives you a good feeling to know you saved someone.

[Elliott]

Mr.T, on Jan 22 2007, 07:38 PM, said:

Yes, you do need faith. People can be presented with all this evidence, but it takes faith to believe that he exists. The evidence proves that miracles have happened, and that predictions were made and came true. There is no way to say that he exists for sure, there are no pictures of him or sightings (except for his son 2000 years ago). But there aslo is no evidence to suggest he doesn't. Even though there is evidence to suggest he's real, and none to suggest he isn't, more people choose to believe he doesn't, simply because they can't fathome it. That is why faith is needed.

About Noah's arc. Here. I know very well that it states "Even if Noah's Ark is Not Proven, Noah's Ark still could have landed on Mount Ararat." That only means, that if Noah's Ark is real, then Mt. Ararat is the most likely place for it to have landed. The Ark was built in that general area (around the mediteranian), remanants of a huge vessel (an Ark sized vessel) have been found there, and the height of the mountain all suggest that it landed there.

About the prophecies, there are about 300 of them. None of which are the least bit vague. One in particular, predicts Christ's crucifixion. The prophecy dates back to 1017 B.C. and predicts that a man in the house of
David (Jesus) will have his hands and feet pierced (i.e. he will be crucified). This prophecy was written 800 years before the Romans even started crucifixions. This is just an outline of the prophecy, though. For the actual refrence, read Psalm 22: 6-18. It is a poem written by king David in 1017 B.C. (who really did exist, and not just because the bible said so). On a side note, every person on this planet can be traced back to three men, Shem, Ham, and Japheth. These are Noah's three sons. A prophecy said that Jesus would be a decendant of Shem. Turns out, he was (according to the bible). That prophecy was made around 1440 B.C., a good 1400 years before Jesus was even born.

As for archeological and scientific proof, the archeological proof is Noah's arc in Mt. Ararat, and the scientific is the radiohalos I talked about earlier. There are others, though, besides them.

A good refrence for you, is "More than a carpenter," a book written by Josh McDowell who is a former atheist. It lists ten points which suggest God exists. He was previously studying Christianity to prove that it was a hoax. He had written a book 2 inches thick about his findings. Now, he's a Christian preacher.

How does the discovery of an over sized boat prove the existence of a supernatural being? All that proves is that maybe there was some guy called Noah who built a boat and put a bunch of animals in it, and even then it doesn't prove that the 40 day flood occurred. Also, have you ever thought about where all that water went? I mean, to flood the entire earth is a hell of a lot of water, it can't have all evaporated / soaked back into the ground could it? Then again, I suppose it's a whole lot more convenient to say that God magically made it disappear.

You also can't use the prophecy within the bible that predicts events that took place later in the bible to prove the existence of God either. Do you have any prophecies written in the bible that predict events that take place after the events of the bible? Is there any prophecies spoken of in the bible that predict anything that happened in the past 100 years?

Furthermore, I'd love to see anyone trace my family tree back to 3 single people who lived thousands of years ago.

Ravenblade, on Jan 22 2007, 11:00 PM, said:

@Agatio - There probably isnt any real need for religion in all honesty - i mean, i guess as an insitution it exists to give people guidance in their faith and such - some people stick to it very rigidly, some dont. I havent been to church for a couple of years (Apart from Christmas) and i get along ok. For me, i turn to religion cos i tried not believing in it (earnestly) and..i dunno, i wasnt as happy a person - i felt down, things kept defeating me. I felt kinda pointless. I mean...Im not especially enamoured with the idea that im just another link in the evolutionary chain - basically, i perform better when i have a religion that gives me an overall sense purpose (Never heard a satisfactory argument from an atheist providing me with a purpose for their existence. Never - "To be happy/ for the species/experiences/dunno - all dont work for me). That being the case, i accept that my belief could be wrong - but frankly, if i found out today, that there was irrefutable proof that God doesnt exist, i would continue believing in Him. Its part of who I am, and its what makes me stronger than most other people around me.

If people are so certain God doesnt exist, why do they spend so much time trying to prove it? Are you trying to save those of us who do? I doubt it, and we can do without it thanks. I actually believe people do it so they can justify their own beliefs to themselves.

I can't speak for all Atheists, as it's such a vast category of people who all give their own unique meaning to their lives, but to say that no Atheist can give a satisfactory argument for the purpose of their existence is such a bold and irrational generalisation. How about 'to enjoy life', or 'to fulfill my own goals'?

Also, I don't spend much time, if any at all trying to disprove the existence of God, this thread is a pretty one-of thing for me at this stage in my life. I'm 100% that the Judeo-Christian portrayal of a God does not exist, and that's good enough for me, but it's not going to stop me from perceiving the 2.1 billion Christians in the world as absolute ****ing morons for what they believe.

[Ravenblade]

Ok - "enjoying life" being a goal...well...i enjoy my life - but i wouldnt build my life around that fact, cos sometimes you need to forgoe your own desires in order to get by. Very often infact. Does that mean the meaning of your life is something good happening once in a while? Are the bad times irrelevant? Its just part of the bigger picture, you cant channel all your efforts into "happiness" and "the good life" as your reason for being alive.

As for fulfilling your own goals...well again, i suppose thats valid, but i wouldnt say my own goals are the be all and end all of my life - cos what if they dont happen...does that mean I have failed in life? Maybe you would think to create new goals. But then, doesnt that mean that your goals are somewhat superficial and more of an attempt to give life meaning than a *reason* for your existence, as it doesnt really matter if you dont manage to pull one off - you can just invent another!

Dunno, maybe you can live that simply, but i cant. I find the idea that i have to justify my own existence in terms of self delusions like "I wanna be happy" and "I wanna succeed" kinda insulting. They're just perceptions - i want to measure up against something that, ~if~ it exists, is real and constant. Not vague and alterable. God is that for me. If it truly doesnt exist, then its no less of a reason to exist than the ones you put forward, which are equally none existent and perception based.

This has to lead you to say that there is NO reason to exist whatsoever, in which case we should probably just all run off the edge of a cliff right now. At least with my view i believe in something that, if it DOES exist, is real and a meaning to my life.

[Toasty]

Agatio, on Jan 22 2007, 06:40 AM, said:

How does the discovery of an over sized boat prove the existence of a supernatural being? All that proves is that maybe there was some guy called Noah who built a boat and put a bunch of animals in it, and even then it doesn't prove that the 40 day flood occurred. Also, have you ever thought about where all that water went? I mean, to flood the entire earth is a hell of a lot of water, it can't have all evaporated / soaked back into the ground could it? Then again, I suppose it's a whole lot more convenient to say that God magically made it disappear.

You also can't use the prophecy within the bible that predicts events that took place later in the bible to prove the existence of God either. Do you have any prophecies written in the bible that predict events that take place after the events of the bible? Is there any prophecies spoken of in the bible that predict anything that happened in the past 100 years?

Furthermore, I'd love to see anyone trace my family tree back to 3 single people who lived thousands of years ago.

1) It can, because it's in the general area, the correct height, the correct size, and absolutely no one at that time could've predicted a flood of that magnitude long enough before, that they could build such a massive vessel. The fact that a boats remains are even there says that earths water levels must have been incredibly high at that time (i.e. the great flood in the bible). Scientists (yes, that's right, the ones who don't believe in god) believed that around that time era, most of earths water was contained in earth's atmosphere. Right now, 97% of earth's water is in the oceans. Back then, the oceans accounted for much less. According to the bible, it rained so hard that it flooded the earth (in reality, it was probably just around the mediterainean). It could've taken 40+ days for the water to drain from there to the other oceans (it probably took more than 40 days for all of the water to recede, but only 40 days for them to find the tip of the mountain). That explains why there's a huge ship frozen in the side of a mountain way above sea level, and also how the water got there, and why it isn't there today.

2) I said King David wrote a poem about someone being crucified (Jesus) 800 years before anyone had instituted crucifixtions. I don't see how King David (who archeologists know existed) could've predicted anyone being crucified at that time. Not unless of course, God told him it in a dream, as he's done with many other people in the bible. That, sir, is how I can say he existed through the prophecies.

3) It's called genetics. They don't need to trace your bloodline, only find the different aleals/chromozomes/etc. (can't remember what there called it's been a year since I learned it all). They've been able to figure out that 1/8 Irishmen decended from the same man. They did it by looking for the same aleals/whatever in their DNA. So far, apparently there are three specific aleals/whatever found commonly in hundreds of thousands of people. Possibly a few billion. For example, a third of them might have one aleal in common, antother third would have the other, and the rest would have the one left over. If that many people have the same aleal, then that means they decended from the same person. The only thing they can't prove, is that those three people were related. At least not as far as I know. That, is how I can say you decended from 1 of 3 men who lived thousands of years ago.

There's a scientific explination for just about everything in the bible. I'll be happy to answer any more of your questions.

[Twit]

Religion is important to the human race for three huge reasons. Morals, purpose, and retribution.

Without the religious people setting morals, our peaceful society would not be as peaceful as youd think. For example, morals such as not committing adultery and not drinking alcohol. These are two morals taught in my holy book, and probably in other holy books. Without religion being there, more of these immoral actions will be preformed, because there is no rule, there is nothing to follow. Many rules are based off of religion, such as "Thou shall not kill." It might have been a law before the religion, but religion strengthened the rule.

Everyone needs a purpose in life, because without it, they will feel lost, and confused in their spiritual side. Many say, "I'm not religious, and look at me." Well, you might just be different, or you might be falling into a hole and you don't even know why. People want to know why things happen, and religion sets that. Sure you might not think its true, but thats where fate plays in.

Now, when some person kills half of the world, hypothetically, and then dies, what happens to him? Is he just dead, after ALL those people he killed? Thats all that happens? This is where retribution ties in. When someone does something horrible, there has to be a punishment. Religion gives that retribution of "Hell". Also, when someone does good, he expects to be rewarded. That comes in the form of "Heaven".

I'm not condoning science, because I embrace scientific advancements. I'm not taking down religion either, I am religious myself. Those are just simply reasons why religion benefited society.

Oh, and I've seen these debates go from happy discussion to complete flame wars. Lets avoid the latter :D~

[Golden Legacy]

Ladies and Gentlemen, the Camerlengo from the Dan Brown novel, Angels & Demons.

Quote

"Medicine, electronic communications, space travel, genetic manipulation ... these are the miracles about which we now tell our children. These are the miracles we herald as proof that science will bring us the answers. The ancient stories of immaculate conceptions, burning bushes, and parting seas are no longer relevant. God has become obsolete. Science has won the battle. We concede."

A rustle of confusion and bewilderment swept through the chapel. "But science's victory," the camerlengo added, his voice intensifying, "has cost every one of us. And it has cost us deeply."

Silence.

"Science may have alleviated the miseries of disease and drudgery and provided an array of gadgetry for our entertainment and convenience, but it has left us in a world without wonder. Our sunsets have been reduced to wavelengths and frequencies. The complexities of the universe have been shredded into mathematical equations. Even our self-worth as human beings has been destroyed. Science proclaims that Planet Earth and its inhabitants are a meaningless speck in the grand scheme. A cosmic accident." He paused. "Even the technology that promises to unite us, divides us. Each of us is now electronically connected to the globe, and yet we feel utterly alone. We are bombarded with violence, division, fracture, and betrayal. Skepticism has become a virtue. Cynicism and demand for proof has become enlightened thought. Is it any wonder that humans now feel more depressed and defeated than they have at any point in human history? Does science hold anything sacred? Science looks for answers by probing our unborn fetuses. Science even presumes to rearrange our own DNA. It shatters God's world into smaller and smaller pieces in quest of meaning ... and all it finds is more questions."

…"The ancient war between science and religion is over," the camerlengo said. "You have won. But you have not won fairly. You have not won by providing answers. You have won by so radically reorienting our society that the truths we once saw as signposts now seem inapplicable. Religion cannot keep up. Scientific growth is exponential. It feeds on itself like a virus. Every new breakthrough opens doors for new breakthroughs. Mankind took thousands of years to progress from the wheel to the car. Yet only decades from the car into space. Now we measure scientific progress in weeks. We are spinning out of control. The rift between us grows deeper and deeper, and as religion is left behind, people find themselves in a spiritual void. We cry out for meaning. And believe me, we do cry out. We see UFOs, engage in channeling, spirit contact, out-of-body experiences, mindquests-all these eccentric ideas have a scientific veneer, but they are unashamedly irrational. They are the desperate cry of the modern soul, lonely and tormented, crippled by its own enlightenment and its inability to accept meaning in anything removed from technology."

Mortati could feel himself leaning forward in his seat. He and the other cardinals and people around the world were hanging on this priest's every utterance. The camerlengo spoke with no rhetoric or vitriol. No references to scripture or Jesus Christ. He spoke in modern terms, unadorned and pure. Somehow, as though the words were flowing from God himself, he spoke the modern language ... delivering the ancient message. In that moment, Mortati saw one of the reasons the late Pope held this young man so dear. In a world of apathy, cynicism, and technological deification, men like the camerlengo, realists who could speak to our souls like this man just had, were the church's only hope.

The camerlengo was talking more forcefully now. "Science, you say, will save us. Science, I say, has destroyed us. Since the days of Galileo, the church has tried to slow the relentless march of science, sometimes with misguided means, but always with benevolent intention. Even so, the temptations are too great for man to resist. I warn you, look around yourselves. The promises of science have not been kept. Promises of efficiency and simplicity have bred nothing but pollution and chaos. We are a fractured and frantic species . . . moving down a path of destruction."

The camerlengo paused a long moment and then sharpened his eyes on the camera.

"Who is this God science? Who is the God who offers his people power but no moral framework to tell you how to use that power? What kind of God gives a child fire but does not warn the child of its dangers? The language of science comes with no signposts about good and bad. Science textbooks tell us how to create a nuclear reaction, and yet they contain no chapter asking us if it is a good or a bad idea.

"To science, I say this. The church is tired. We are exhausted from trying to be your signposts. Our resources are drying up from our campaign to be the voice of balance as you plow blindly on in your quest for smaller chips and larger profits. We ask not why you will not govern yourselves, but how can you? Your world moves so fast that if you stop even for an instant to consider the implications of your actions, someone more efficient will whip past you in a blur. So you move on. You proliferate weapons of mass destruction, but it is the Pope who travels the world beseeching leaders to use restraint. You clone living creatures, but it is the church reminding us to consider the moral implications of our actions. You encourage people to interact on phones, video screens, and computers, but it is the church who opens its doors and reminds us to commune in person as we were meant to do. You even murder unborn babies in the name of research that will save lives. Again, it is the church who points out the fallacy of this reasoning. "And all the while, you proclaim the church is ignorant. But who is more ignorant? The man who cannot define lightning, or the man who does not respect its awesome power? This church is reaching out to you. Reaching out to everyone. And yet the more we reach, the more you push us away. Show me proof there is a God, you say. I say use your telescopes to look to the heavens, and tell me how there could not be a God!"

The camerlengo had tears in his eyes now. "You ask what does God look like. I say, where did that question come from? The answers are one and the same. Do you not see God in your science? How can you miss Him! You proclaim that even the slightest change in the force of gravity or the weight of an atom would have rendered our universe a lifeless mist rather than our magnificent sea of heavenly bodies, and yet you fail to see God's hand in this? Is it really so much easier to believe that we simply chose the right card from a deck of billions? Have we become so spiritually bankrupt that we would rather believe in mathematical impossibility than in a power greater than us?”

"Whether or not you believe in God," the camerlengo said, his voice deepening with deliberation, "you must believe this. When we as a species abandon our trust in the power greater than us, we abandon our sense of accountability. Faith ... all faiths … are admonitions that there is something we cannot understand, something to which we are accountable . . . With faith we are accountable to each other, to ourselves, and to a higher truth. Religion is flawed, but only because man is flawed. If the outside world could see this church as I do ... looking beyond the ritual of these walls . . . they would see a modern miracle... a brotherhood of imperfect, simple souls wanting only to be a voice of compassion in a world spinning out of control. . . .”

[Twit]

Let the record show that Dan Brown's Angels and Demons is fiction.

Sorry, just HAD to say that xD


Yes, that is true. But honestly, those words are truly powerful, and it's probably one of the most comprehensive arguments I've seen in support of religion. Whether the book is fiction or not, those words mean the same. That's why I quoted it as my argument - I doubt I could do a better job myself. - GL/Riad

[Toasty]

Quote

Religion is important to the human race for three huge reasons. Morals, purpose, and retribution.

Without the religious people setting morals, our peaceful society would not be as peaceful as youd think. For example, morals such as not committing adultery and not drinking alcohol. These are two morals taught in my holy book, and probably in other holy books. Without religion being there, more of these immoral actions will be preformed, because there is no rule, there is nothing to follow. Many rules are based off of religion, such as "Thou shall not kill." It might have been a law before the religion, but religion strengthened the rule.

Everyone needs a purpose in life, because without it, they will feel lost, and confused in their spiritual side. Many say, "I'm not religious, and look at me." Well, you might just be different, or you might be falling into a hole and you don't even know why. People want to know why things happen, and religion sets that. Sure you might not think its true, but thats where fate plays in.

Now, when some person kills half of the world, hypothetically, and then dies, what happens to him? Is he just dead, after ALL those people he killed? Thats all that happens? This is where retribution ties in. When someone does something horrible, there has to be a punishment. Religion gives that retribution of "Hell". Also, when someone does good, he expects to be rewarded. That comes in the form of "Heaven".

I'm not condoning science, because I embrace scientific advancements. I'm not taking down religion either, I am religious myself. Those are just simply reasons why religion benefited society.

Oh, and I've seen these debates go from happy discussion to complete flame wars. Lets avoid the latter :)~

Been there and done that....^_^; *stares at PS*

To add onto the morals thing, the U.S. was established on Christianity. If you follow the time lines, America started decliineing in morals when more and more people began to sue for religion being forced on them (and many cases are quite pathetic, i.e. "In God We Trust" in the pledge trying to be removed), or outright rejecting it. Take a looke at our history. The more Christianity is rejected, the more our morals decline. I'm not trying to force Christianity on anyone here, I'm just trying to make a point. On that note, I do believe in alot of what science teaches us, until it comes to evolution and the big bang.

[Twit]

Twit, on Jan 22 2007, 07:49 PM, said:

Yes, that is true. But honestly, those words are truly powerful, and it's probably one of the most comprehensive arguments I've seen in support of religion. Whether the book is fiction or not, those words mean the same. That's why I quoted it as my argument - I doubt I could do a better job myself. - GL/Riad

Well, taking those words into account, the statements that man says is very radical. It pushes for something unachievable: the halting of science for religion. There will always be wonder in a non-believers eyes, and science is just solid proof. Religion is based on faith, but those without fate need science to prove the inner workings of the world. And the results are almost immediate.

[Golden Legacy]

At the very least, what he's saying is that science isn't the pure and benevolent and more importantly, it isn't the flawless part of humanity. In fact, as he argues, we lose more than we think to science.

[Xelina]

Very agreeable. As we ingolf ourself into science, we are able to commite more sinster crimes. Like using lots of animals for testing harmful vaccine's a virus. Like genocide, the Cold War, the Cuba fair. That all has to do with violence and destruction.

This reminds me of Final Fantasy VII, where the whole world feeds on the plante's blood line. Where science used humans to create new type of utra super humans, where no one cares if the world dies or lives. A world where everyone is ruled by one, and lives in an ignorance life.

Sounds bad? that might be what will happen to us if we go down the path of ignorance and destruction.

[Elliott]

Ravenblade, on Jan 23 2007, 05:54 AM, said:

Ok - "enjoying life" being a goal...well...i enjoy my life - but i wouldnt build my life around that fact, cos sometimes you need to forgoe your own desires in order to get by. Very often infact. Does that mean the meaning of your life is something good happening once in a while? Are the bad times irrelevant? Its just part of the bigger picture, you cant channel all your efforts into "happiness" and "the good life" as your reason for being alive.

Like most Christians, you're finding it hard to get your head around a philosophy that differs from your own. My purpose for existence is one that I create for myself. At the moment, that is to enjoy myself. But obviously enjoying myself can't be the one thing I do 24/7. There are always going to be hardships for everyone, from the most pious Christians to the most irreligious Atheists such as myself. That's reality.

Ravenblade, on Jan 23 2007, 05:54 AM, said:

As for fulfilling your own goals...well again, i suppose thats valid, but i wouldnt say my own goals are the be all and end all of my life - cos what if they dont happen...does that mean I have failed in life? Maybe you would think to create new goals. But then, doesnt that mean that your goals are somewhat superficial and more of an attempt to give life meaning than a *reason* for your existence, as it doesnt really matter if you dont manage to pull one off - you can just invent another!

**** happens, deal with it. That's the way life is: unfair. I don't personally believe there is an absolute 'reason' for existence. I believe that we're here for 70 or 80 odd years, and we should do with it what we can. If people want to spend their life in abstinence in the hope that it will pay off when they die, then good for them. I'd rather make the most of what I know I have, rather than take a gamble that there is something beyond this life.

Ravenblade, on Jan 23 2007, 05:54 AM, said:

Dunno, maybe you can live that simply, but i cant. I find the idea that i have to justify my own existence in terms of self delusions like "I wanna be happy" and "I wanna succeed" kinda insulting. They're just perceptions - i want to measure up against something that, ~if~ it exists, is real and constant. Not vague and alterable. God is that for me. If it truly doesnt exist, then its no less of a reason to exist than the ones you put forward, which are equally none existent and perception based.

How is achieving goals any simpler than believing in a book that explains the nature of the universe? I'd rather look into things, read up on them and formulate my own beliefs rather than just swallow everything the church and a book tells me. How is my way of life simpler than a religious person's?

Ravenblade, on Jan 23 2007, 05:54 AM, said:

This has to lead you to say that there is NO reason to exist whatsoever, in which case we should probably just all run off the edge of a cliff right now. At least with my view i believe in something that, if it DOES exist, is real and a meaning to my life.

I believe there is no ultimate purpose to existence in general, but that doesn't mean that I can't fashion my ow meaning to give to my life. What's so bad about enjoying myself, experimenting, and living life the way I want to, just because it's not the same as a religious person's?

Maybe you're not deliberately trying to condemn my way of life, but it sure sounds like it.

Mr.T, on Jan 23 2007, 11:22 AM, said:

1) It can, because it's in the general area, the correct height, the correct size, and absolutely no one at that time could've predicted a flood of that magnitude long enough before, that they could build such a massive vessel. The fact that a boats remains are even there says that earths water levels must have been incredibly high at that time (i.e. the great flood in the bible). Scientists (yes, that's right, the ones who don't believe in god) believed that around that time era, most of earths water was contained in earth's atmosphere. Right now, 97% of earth's water is in the oceans. Back then, the oceans accounted for much less. According to the bible, it rained so hard that it flooded the earth (in reality, it was probably just around the mediterainean). It could've taken 40+ days for the water to drain from there to the other oceans (it probably took more than 40 days for all of the water to recede, but only 40 days for them to find the tip of the mountain). That explains why there's a huge ship frozen in the side of a mountain way above sea level, and also how the water got there, and why it isn't there today.

What you seem to keep forgetting is that the existence of a ship in the side of a mountain doesn't constitute the existence of a supernatural creator of the universe.

Mr.T, on Jan 23 2007, 11:22 AM, said:

2) I said King David wrote a poem about someone being crucified (Jesus) 800 years before anyone had instituted crucifixtions. I don't see how King David (who archeologists know existed) could've predicted anyone being crucified at that time. Not unless of course, God told him it in a dream, as he's done with many other people in the bible. That, sir, is how I can say he existed through the prophecies.

King David was written about in the bible, and so was Jesus. This all happened thousands of years ago. You simply cannot prove that he literally predicted the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. You just can't. You're just taking everything the Bible says as truth because you're a typical, 14 year old, indoctrinated Christian.

Mr.T, on Jan 23 2007, 11:22 AM, said:

3) It's called genetics. They don't need to trace your bloodline, only find the different aleals/chromozomes/etc. (can't remember what there called it's been a year since I learned it all). They've been able to figure out that 1/8 Irishmen decended from the same man. They did it by looking for the same aleals/whatever in their DNA. So far, apparently there are three specific aleals/whatever found commonly in hundreds of thousands of people. Possibly a few billion. For example, a third of them might have one aleal in common, antother third would have the other, and the rest would have the one left over. If that many people have the same aleal, then that means they decended from the same person. The only thing they can't prove, is that those three people were related. At least not as far as I know. That, is how I can say you decended from 1 of 3 men who lived thousands of years ago.

I'm sorry, but it's just not plausible that over 6 billion people, 3 distinct races (caucasian, asian, black), hundreds of languages and an infinite amount of cultures all came from 3 people who live a mere few thousand years ago.

[Toasty]

You know, just because I'm 14 doesn't mean I believe everything people tell me. I'm not some gullible little kid who believes something for no other reason than I was brought up on it. Even though I believe in Christianity, I have my doubts sometimes. But most of the time, I believe because regardless of your accusations, there is proof that at least some supernatural being exists. And you, Agatio, have yet to give me one fact that says otherwise. Evolution? Yeah. Sure. Disproved years ago. Big bang? Well where did the little spec come from in the first place? And How could someone predict that a person would be crucified 800 years before anyone had started crucifixions. Whether Jesus was proved real by that poem or not, there is simply no way David could have just randomly created a poem about someone being crucified, when the idea wasn't even presented until hundreds of years later.

If a boat frozen in a mountain wasn't put there, a few thousand feet above sea level from a great flood, which could only have happened if some being such as god created it, then tell me. How the hell did it get there? It's shear size and weight, and the steepness of the slope rules out it being dragged there. There shure as hell weren't cranes in that time period, so please. Enlighten me with your answer.

And yes, it's possible. Evolution isn't real, but adaption is. They're similar, the only difference, is that adaption is much less extreme. Caucasians may have become white because their region offered much greater UV ray protection, thus lessening the need for darker skin. Exactly opposite for Africans. The only thing that happened was that their skin color changed, because the last time I checked, all humans look alike on the inside. On top of that, if the size of a birds beak can change in one season (these birds are found on an island near Australia), then a humans skin color shure can darken over a few thousand years. It's called tanning. Eventually, the skin color just stayed dark.

So, Agatio, I'm still waiting for your unrefutable proof that God Almighty doesn't exist. Because right now, I've given you three reasons why he does, and you havn't given me one for why he doesn't.

Quote

I'd rather make the most of what I know I have, rather than take a gamble that there is something beyond this life.

But for this last comment, I'll give you a compromise. When you're on your death bed, with nothing to look foreward to than dieing, then turn to christianity. That way, you'll have lived life the way you wanted to, and still go to heaven, because the only requirement is that you accept Jesus as your savior. But if armageddon comes before your death, then you'll know for a fact that Christian beliefes are true, because Armageddon is predicted in the bible. If it comes true, and it was predicted by the bible, then God must be real.

[Elliott]

http://en.wikipedia....or_Noah%27s_Ark

According to this, the ark has not been proven to be found.

Quote

The team claims to have discovered an "object" 13,000 feet above sea level, which had the appearance of blackened petrified wooden beams, and was "about the size of a small aircraft carrier" (400 ft long), and supposedly consistent with the dimensions provided in Genesis of 300 cubits by 50 cubits. The team also claimed to find fossilised sea creatures inside the petrified wood, and in the immediate vicinity of the site. One member of the team claims that 'a Houston lab used by the Smithsonian' tested some beams and confirmed they were petrified wood containing fossilised sea animals, but the name of the laboratory was not given. No one outside the expedition has offered independent confirmation, and apart from a few purported beams, no photographic images of this supposed Ark in its entirety have been made available (though short video segments have been made available). The team's consensus on the "object" is not absolute; Reg Lyle, another expedition member, described the find as appearing to be "a basalt dike".

It is the official position of the BASE Institute that Iran was the logical resting place of the Ark. Their website does not definitely claim the object to be the Ark, but concludes that it is "a candidate".

There's no photos, and it's all a bunch of eyewitness accounts and hearsay. But I suppose if you swallow the testimony of a 2000 year old book, then you can pass off an "object" as an ark that existed thousands of years ago and supposedly carried 2 of every animal to safety and assisted in the re-population of the world.

As for King David, like I said, his prophecy as well as the outcome are both written about in the Bible. The Bible was written by (bias) Christians who could have, and probably did put whatever they wanted to in there. I ask you again: Show me a prophecy that is written about in the bible, that has occurred in the past couple of centuries, and it better not be something vague. When we're talking about proof, it needs to be hard factual evidence, not remnants of petrified wood found in the side of mountains.

Anyway, it's impossibly to disprove the existence of God, I accept that. I simply don't believe in the existence because I don't see any irrefutable evidence that prove that he does exist. You can talk as much as you want about adaption and unidentifiable objects found in the side of mountains, but at the end of the day, there's still no proof of God. Because if there undeniable proof that God existed, it would itself create a paradox. The Christian religion requires that you must have faith, and when proof is introduced, then faith is no longer necessary.

Even if there was a higher entity of some sort, which I am not absolutely denying the existence of, I can't be the Judeo-Christian god that is talked about in the bible, because his very existence is flawed, as Zexion took the trouble to explain a few posts back. If there was a higher being, I simply do not see how it affects any of the goings on today, as they can all be explained one way or another by ration thinking and science, if not by me, then by someone else.

[Toasty]

The funniest part about your post, is the quote. The fact that there are sea creatures found at that elevation proves that there was flooding of that magnitude at one point. The size of the beam they found, and I quote, was "consistent with the dimensions provided in Genesis of 300 cubits by 50 cubits." For those of you who don't know what Genisis is, it's the first chapter of the Christian Bible.

Might I also add (and this is a quote from the same article) "According to Genesis 8:4 the Ark came to rest "in the mountains of Ararat."" Yet again, the bible predicted there at least being something of a vessel like nature being found in a specific (not vague) place. And lo and behold, we found it.

on a side not of this, the dimentions of the beam are accurate giving the circumstances, and though I cannot find the article, a man has proposed theoretical blueprints of the Arc, and unlike all other proposals, it's dimensions not only fit perfectly, but it was also within the capabilities of people around that era, and the boat could have easily carried the suggested load of animals. That at least proves that it's possible an Arc was built.

As for everyone being decendants of the three men, I've explained to you as much as I can about it. If you still refuse it (even though it's scientifically proven), then there's not much I can do about it.

But overall, thank you, Agatio, for providing me with sufficient facts to back up my statings. ;)

[Edit] And Agatio, your biased on the side of there not being a God. When it comes to faith, or lack there of, absolutely everyone is biased. But out of all of that, at least one of them has to be right. So no matter what really is right, it's biased anyway.

[Elliott]

Such a shame that the expedition was led by:

Quote

Bob Cornuke of the fundamentalist Christian Bible Archeology Search and Exploration Institute.

How is an Atheist such as myself supposed to take anything a fundamentalist Christian says seriously? Even if I was to believe what he says, it's still all going to be merely hearsay and eye-witness accounts. There hasn't been an expedition of real scientists there to actually document their findings. You being a Christian yourself of course took the quote as fact because it was about a Christian expedition, but for you to expect me to take that seriously is out of the question. Perhaps when there exists irrefutable proof that the unidentifiable "object" is actually 'Noah's Ark', maybe then I will believe that there was also some kind of flooding that came with it.

Furthermore, what's to say they are actually "sea" creatures in the first place? I didn't see anything backing that up. Even if they were sea creatures, it's entirely possibly that they were transported up the mountain, and that it wasn't an arc but some variety of zoo or laboratory. Anything is possible, nothing is proven.

So of course we're going to disagree on these so-called "facts".

You read something about petrified wood and fossilized animal remains found in a mountain that was mentioned in your holy book, and you're immediately going to recognise them as remains of 'Noah's Ark', and use those flimsy details as "proof" of a massive flood that had to be caused by your god. Whereas me, being a more perceptive individual, would see it as it really is: remnants supposedly found by fundamentalist Christians in the side of a mountain that was mentioned in the bible that prove nothing.

Mr.T, on Jan 23 2007, 06:14 PM, said:

And yes, it's possible. Evolution isn't real, but adaption is. They're similar, the only difference, is that adaption is much less extreme. Caucasians may have become white because their region offered much greater UV ray protection, thus lessening the need for darker skin. Exactly opposite for Africans. The only thing that happened was that their skin color changed, because the last time I checked, all humans look alike on the inside. On top of that, if the size of a birds beak can change in one season (these birds are found on an island near Australia), then a humans skin color shure can darken over a few thousand years. It's called tanning. Eventually, the skin color just stayed dark.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution

Looks pretty real to me. Evolution by process of natural selection is the one that's just a theory at the moment, and even then, that makes more sense to me than God pulling a universe out of his arse for no apparent reason other than to entertain himself. I mean have you ever wondered why exactly God created the universe in the first place? Does the bible ever give you a reason for that?

Mr.T, on Jan 23 2007, 06:14 PM, said:

But for this last comment, I'll give you a compromise. When you're on your death bed, with nothing to look foreward to than dieing, then turn to christianity. That way, you'll have lived life the way you wanted to, and still go to heaven, because the only requirement is that you accept Jesus as your savior. But if armageddon comes before your death, then you'll know for a fact that Christian beliefes are true, because Armageddon is predicted in the bible. If it comes true, and it was predicted by the bible, then God must be real.

Wow, I guess I'll just have to wait 50 odd years until I'm on my death bed then, won't I? And even then, I very, very highly doubt I completely turn back on everything I have done in my life, and "accept Jesus as my savior" just so I can get a ticket into a mythical dimension that I still wouldn't even know / believe to exist.

Your Armageddon point is completely ridiculous. I'm not even going to bother tearing it apart, that's just wasting my time.

[Ravenblade]

Good source GL - echoes stuff i was saying earlier.

Agatio, im not trying to condemn your way of life, and believe it or not i understand why you think the way you do. I think like that too a great deal of the time x.x What i was trying to convey, was why *I* believe in religion and why *I* find it to be a comfort to me. I mean, that's what you asked initially isnt it?

EDIT - and y'know, im not even that religious - I do very little of what the Bible and the Church say and i hardly ever do anything based out of either of these. This of course means im a pretty appalling Christian, but infact i see myself as a liberal. I know the Bible was written by man, and contains inaccuracies, i know some of it has been bent for improper use - does that make me disbelieve in God? No. I like singing hymns in church, i like meeting with other people to worship God, but im not exactly what any Christian would describe as religious.

When are people gonna understand that you dont have to have religion to have faith?

[Sea of Time]

Ravenblade, on Jan 23 2007, 08:30 AM, said:

EDIT - and y'know, im not even that religious - I do very little of what the Bible and the Church say and i hardly ever do anything based out of either of these. This of course means im a pretty appalling Christian, but infact i see myself as a liberal. I know the Bible was written by man, and contains inaccuracies, i know some of it has been bent for improper use - does that make me disbelieve in God? No. I like singing hymns in church, i like meeting with other people to worship God, but im not exactly what any Christian would describe as religious.

When are people gonna understand that you dont have to have religion to have faith?

I feel basically the same about religion as you, Raven. I don't go to church every week, in fact, I only really go once a year (on Christmas). I don't believe everything the Bible says, I don't believe that everything we see around us was made by some higher being. I do believe in Jesus though, and I do believe that everything in the New Testament actually happened.

But because I don't believe word for word what the Bible says, I guess that means I don't really have religion. But I do believe there is something after death, and I guess that means I have faith.

I know that post really didn't contribute much, but that's just what I believe. I'm not sure if I'll ever argue for it though.

~5000~

[Caael]

I really really dont care for religion. I dont like the idea of following a set way of life to acheive nothing ( or in the Buddhists case, Enlightenment) I dont want to commit myself to something that I will eventually find a flaw in. Thats my problem, always finding flaws.

[Eugine]

Evangelist Challenges Atheists to Bible-Less Debate

Can't wait to see this debate. I really hope this man can provide some logics/scientific facts to the existence of God. Maybe on May 5th, it could be the time when the non-believer believes once again. OR...
It could be the time of the non-believer.

[Golden Djinn13]

Thats WW3 waiting to happen.

Is that gonna be on tv or something?

[Eugine]

Quote

ABC has said that they will film the debate, which will take place on May 5 in New York City, and will stream it live on their website as well as use footage for their program Nightline. Martin Bashir, co-anchor of Nightline, will moderate the event.

It's going to be streamed live on the ABC website, but they're going to air selective footage on TV.
Most likely they are going to be pro-God in the selective footage imo.

[Golden Djinn13]

I want to see if it's possible to prove god without the use of a bible. So far, the Atheists seem to have the advantage over him.

[Nyktos]

The atheist will win. Period.

[Platinum Sun]

Agreed. That Bible is the evangelist's only weapon. He's toast.

[Eugine]

That's why I'm so excited to see the outcome. He has to be really brave to put his pride where his mouth is --- because in my lifetime, no one has proven God's existence scientifically.

[Platinum Sun]

And there's more than one reason for that. As Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy states:

You cannot prove the existance of God, because by providing proof, you deny faith, thus destroying the basis of God's exsistance.

[Folcon]

if you say so.

the only higher power i belive exists, is that of Murphy and his blasted Law.

[Nyktos]

In my opinion, it doesn't matter whether God exists or not. It does however matter whether *insert religion* is true or not.

[Folcon]

but most of the stories in *insert religon* tend to be over exagerated stories, that make me dought said religion. i just don't particapate in any afiliation.

[Nyktos]

I'm unreligious as well, but I don't really believe (or care for that matter) whether God exists or not.

[Folcon]

i agree, i just live my life the way I feel i sould live, by my standards. but i do respect other peoples' beliefs. as long as those beliefs arn't forced on me.

[Toasty]

escout, on May 3 2007, 05:44 PM, said:

but most of the stories in *insert religon* tend to be over exagerated stories, that make me dought said religion. i just don't particapate in any afiliation.

Exaggerated stories? Hah! I bet you haven't red anything in the bible outside of Noah's Ark. In most of the stories, an [athiest] could easily replace a miracle with mere coincidence. Though to a believer in Christianity like myself, those aren't mere coincidences.

That aside, I'd like to see the debate, and all of it (not just bits and pieces on TV). I myself have been able to find fairly reasonable proof that god does exist, but you'd have to read the article/watch the documentary where I got it from to understand it since I phail at explaining things. At the very least, I've found one thing that stands as hard evidence.

[Platinum Sun]

Yeah, walking on water, raising the dead, turning water into wine, those all could've esaily happened coincidentally. I just so happened that these perfectly normal events occurred when Jesus was around. I can't stress enough how normal and believable all that is. Why just the other day I was checking my car's washer fluid, and lo! It was wine.

[Split Infinity]

I don't think I've made a proper post in this topic yet, so I'll just say this. I believe that there is a God and that he governs over all, though I do not feel a need to overly worship Him; just acknowledge His existence, respect Him and try to lead a life of righteousness. I myself have a very finely tuned sense of justice, even if I do forget about it sometimes.

[Toasty]

Platinum Sun, on May 5 2007, 08:07 AM, said:

Yeah, walking on water, raising the dead, turning water into wine, those all could've esaily happened coincidentally. I just so happened that these perfectly normal events occurred when Jesus was around. I can't stress enough how normal and believable all that is. Why just the other day I was checking my car's washer fluid, and lo! It was wine.

That's not what I meant. In the book of Job, satan challanges god, and says that he could sway Job's (pronounced Jobe) belief in christ. God accepts the challenge, and satan is allowed to do a whole slew of stuff that, in the end, didn't sway Job's faith. Some of the stuff included tornadoes (a natural occurance), fires (yet another natural occurance), and if I remember right, earthquakes (again, a natural occurance). His sheep and other livestock were even mostly killed off by wild animals (i.e. wolves, foxes, etc.). Everything that happened to Job could have easily been a coincidence, though I don't believe it was.

The more famous and well known bible stories are of course going to be the wilder ones, because they're more entertaining. The ones that are more reasonable are less known because they're obviously less exciting.

And note how in my previous post I said "most" and not "all".

[Golden Legacy]

I am posting this in response to what Caael said in the Homosexuality topic.

Caael, on May 22 2007, 02:15 PM, said:

What's more likely, Watch?

Some guy who has lived for ever, that made the universe with his hands, and it took 7 days, or a massive explosion the fused different atoms to create elements?

You find it more likely that a random explosion created matter, spread throughout the universe, and took 15 billion years to go to its present state? You find it more believable that life began as a result of the most random of reactions? Even the most diehard scientists agree that for life to exist on Earth as it did, it would take a near mathematical impossibility - that matter would have to condense first of all, into the proper-size star, into the planets that orbit around it, into the matter that allows the basic elements of carbon, oxygen, etc. to exist.

Is it more likely that the entire model that the universe is based on (which is so structurally, and ingeniously, devised) was creatred on the most random of chance? Why is it beyond you to accept this, and NOT accept the fact that all this could have been dictated?

[Nyktos]

If it was dictated, where did the dictator come from? Where did he get the power to dictate from? It is far, far, far more probable for basic life to emerge randomly and then evolve then for a fully-formed lifeform to be created randomly with the ability to asexually create other lifeforms, including those that are biologically nearly completely different (assuming God is humanoid here).

[Aquamarine]

GL, is it really more likely that there is some powerful dude that nobody can see who has existed for countless millions of years?

Although I so often agree with you, I'm with Caael and Nyktos on this one.

[Caael]

Golden Legacy, on May 22 2007, 10:22 PM, said:

Even the most diehard scientists agree that for life to exist on Earth as it did, it would take a near mathematical impossibility

Improbable, not impossible. Unlikely things happen.


If Adam and Eve were the first humans, about 6000 years ago, then why have we found more evidence dating back to over 200 million years ago? Surely if Dinosaurs were created by God, then they would be mentioned in the bible but aren't. We have actual evidence that dinosaurs existed, and way before Adam and Eve were supposed to have. And why have we found no bones of Adam and Eve?

[Golden Legacy]

Topic Revived, as per Eugine's request.

[Viridian Tiger]

Oh, my. I'm very sorry for posting in such an outdated topic. Very truly sorry.
I follow my own religion. In my religion, God does indeed exist, as well as Heaven and angels who reside there. But!!! When you die, you are given three options. 1. Go to Heaven 2. Go to your own world that you have created, one that will truly make you happy( Umm... like you are the "God" of your world 3. Be reborn and live a new life, or live the life you had just lived, doing everything all over again, feeling the same feelings that have made you what you are, and such. If you have lived an unruly life, and you want to go into Heaven, then you must fight through 100 battles against demons, then face the Devil/ Hades/ Satan/ whatever you want to call him in the final match. This is known as "Hell's Coliseum". If you lose, you must reincarate and try again, go into your own world, or redo the 100 battles all over again. You spirit will not deminish, but it will be very cruel and hard. And... yeah! That's my religion. I also belive in spiritual things, such as kindly ghosts.( Not wandering spirits that haunt) This is my religion known as the "Ninao" religion.(So I couldn't come up with a name. >.<)

[Aquamarine]

... Please tell me you're joking and that you've been playing too many RPGs lately.

[Gardna]

Is he over eight already? Don't ruin his dreams :P

[Viridian Tiger]

Aquamarine, on Aug 21 2007, 04:37 PM, said:

... Please tell me you're joking and that you've been playing too many RPGs lately.

Oh, dear... perhaps I should lay off. Or should I not? I really don't know. ^^ Oh, well. Such a shame. Aside from the "Hell's Coliseum", the rest is what I believe. ^-^

[Aquamarine]

Nah, don't listen to me, I'm an asshole. I shouldn't bash any body's religion. Sorry for saying that.

[Viridian Tiger]

Oh, no. It's all right. ^^ I actually knew someone was going to say I play waay too much RPG... Even if some of it IS being played over and over again. >.< So what's your religion? ^^

[Aquamarine]

None. Well, officially I'm a Christian, but I'm not religious. Far from it.

[Viridian Tiger]

Yes, sometimes people will stray from religion and be pretty far from, though they are in it. To me, it's nothing to be ashamed of or anything. You can't force something such as religion upon anyone. Evey being in this world lives the way they want to live. ^^

[Gardna]

I believe that there is some kind of a God but I don't like the ways and means of the Latin Church. No self-made afterlife concepts though

[Someone Else]

So anyway, I have a hard time choking down that "God has been forever" and that one day he twirled his fingers around, said "Let there be light" and a state of being came in.

So before I give myself a headache, how could God be forever if NOTHING EXISTED before then?

[Viridian Tiger]

The past may have been discovered, unearthed, and is now knowledge, but it is also a great mystery which cannot be solved.

[Ironsight]

....MAH BRAN HURTZ!!!! l:D
VT: I think your religion is kool :P