Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
jeepster

If this earns me an infraction, then word up

Recommended Posts

However the bearded white robed 'GOD' that we all can't help picturing is misleading I would think whateveryouwannacallit is something completley beyond comprehension........I think all religions come from the same source those similarities to me are too numerous if you really investigate

yes it is misleading, and most major religions have too many similarities to ignore. what i mainly wanted to come back to say was i do not think it is beyond our comprehension, but i do very strongly believe any notion of a God built upon religious texts do not warrant any merit. this is mainly for its ridiculous claims: moses split water, one dude and his family made a giant boat housing two of every animal, creation in 7 days, 13 billion years vs. a few thousand years, dinosaurs and wooly mammoths and cavemen did not exist, the list goes on.

but because some of our science is only in theory stages, the fight is still up for proof for/against a God.

yeah many things are just theory, yet to be proven, such as dark matter, dark energy, string theory, higgs-boson particle (although they are making a machine to test this). despite this, there is plenty of physical observational evidence for the big bang theory, i.e. the universe is still expanding today.

Even Einstein admitted that he believed there was a 'mystical core to the universe'.

"... The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish."

- Einstein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
any notion of a God built upon religious texts do not warrant any merit. this is mainly for its ridiculous claims: moses split water, one dude and his family made a giant boat housing two of every animal, creation in 7 days, 13 billion years vs. a few thousand years, dinosaurs and wooly mammoths and cavemen did not exist, the list goes on.

I think the problem people get into with the Bible in particular and all those things that you mention are that they are allegories or need to be taken into a context of how, when and what purpose they were written for rather than taken literally which unfortunatley some people do taking everything they are told on face value and never questioning or exploring their own faith, but to discount any notion of God based on religious texts as without merit seems a little short sighted, have you read the Torah, the Koran, the Bhagavad Gita?

"... The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish."

What I meant by referring to Einstein is that despite not being religious you have to admit that ther are things that science can't explain or make sense of and we all have to ask the 'why are we here?' question and come up with a way of rationalizing our existense whatever the conclusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I meant by referring to Einstein is that despite not being religious you have to admit that ther are things that science can't explain or make sense of and we all have to ask the 'why are we here?' question and come up with a way of rationalizing our existense whatever the conclusion.

There are plenty of things we can't answer right now. Science is the tool we use to get to those answers.

Dogma written thousands of years ago wont answer anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

apparently im an idiot and im arrogant. haha which unfortunately might be true!

but i will leave you all with this.

i can respect claims of agnosticism. but claims of atheism have no merit. if i say there are no brown rocks w/ triangular white spots on them, then i must have extensive knowledge of the universe, insight into every galaxy, planet and moon, in order for me to absolutely conclusively say that there indeed are no such rocks. atheists claiming there absolutely is no god must also have such an extensive knowledge of every nook and cranny of the universe to conclude the validity of said statement. god could indeed be hiding under a rock! such statements dont hold up as we will never ascertain the greatness of the universe where we can conclusively say these things are true.

what does that mean? thats not to say then by default there is a God (that ultimately requires some measure of faith, regardless of your religion), considering the same argument could be turned around and made for all deists. but instead it leads us to the open possibility that there could be someone greater than us.

as for world religions, either one is right, or theyre all wrong. why? islam, judaism, and christianity all claim their way is the only way to knowing god, while buddhism was a direct rejection of hinduism. that covers about 98% of all world religions right? haha. therefore because of these exclusionist principles, either we are wallowing in some hell, or there truely is no afterlife at all. (don't even get me started with the bahai. ask a buddhist what he thinks of going to islamic hell and see what he says),

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the problem people get into with the Bible in particular and all those things that you mention are that they are allegories or need to be taken into a context of how, when and what purpose they were written for rather than taken literally which unfortunatley some people do taking everything they are told on face value and never questioning or exploring their own faith, but to discount any notion of God based on religious texts as without merit seems a little short sighted, have you read the Torah, the Koran, the Bhagavad Gita?

yes, i understand and agree that they may have been written to not be taken literally, but just a story to just instill good morals and lessons. but with that, how can you take any of it seriously? you can't pick and choose which pages you want to take literally. i feel that religious texts have no credibility as fact; but i also think that it would be good for children to read it growing up as long as they don't read it like it's a documentary. no i have not fully read them, just as no religious person who denies evolution has read all the texts pertaining to it.

What I meant by referring to Einstein is that despite not being religious you have to admit that ther are things that science can't explain or make sense of and we all have to ask the 'why are we here?' question and come up with a way of rationalizing our existense whatever the conclusion.

i think that is another question altogether, regarding fate/destiny/purpose of life what have you. besides our biological purpose to produce offspring and survive, i don't think we each have an ultimate purpose in life, save personal goals. for example, i think the best thing a person can contribute is to try to advance our technology and society, further our understanding of science, and the things that come with it (curing cancer, alternative fuels, world hunger, etc.). may i ask what you think we are here for?

There are plenty of things we can't answer right now. Science is the tool we use to get to those answers.

Dogma written thousands of years ago wont answer anything.

exactly; science is trying to further our understanding and figure out things we don't have the answers to, not simply give up in favour of the easy solution (for example, saying God did it and be done with it)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
if i say there are no brown rocks w/ triangular white spots on them, then i must have extensive knowledge of the universe, insight into every galaxy, planet and moon, in order for me to absolutely conclusively say that there indeed are no such rocks. atheists claiming there absolutely is no god must also have such an extensive knowledge of every nook and cranny of the universe to conclude the validity of said statement.

This is well put, but by the same token you have to admit that you could be wrong also

don't even get me started with the bahai

I am a Baha'i, I don't see why one has to be right or all have to be wrong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^ i concede that the same argument could be used against deists. hence the argument for faith, not by sight but in things unseen.

haha eccles, didnt mean to offend. this forum surprises me in terms of the wide scope of ppl that inhabit it. what i meant though by my statement is that when each religion is explicitly claiming exclusivity, they are exactly that, mutually exclusive. tell a muslim, a hindu, and a jew that theyre all going to the same place when they die. you'll get alot of "wtf?". the central dogma to each of these major world religions is again, exclusivity.

(btw, the temple you guys built a little north of chicago is beautiful. seriously. the polygon throws me off a little bit but its a great temple nonetheless).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think religeon as a whole is just mankinds way to deal with the fear of death. It makes them or atleast takes away some of the fear associated with their ever looming death. Religeon offers them eternal life in the form of a utopia after their death in the "mortal world". But now religeon has just been twisted and warped to control people.......and touch kidz woot!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think we each have an ultimate purpose in life, save personal goals. for example, i think the best thing a person can contribute is to try to advance our technology and society, further our understanding of science, and the things that come with it (curing cancer, alternative fuels, world hunger, etc.). may i ask what you think we are here for?

I agree that the best thing a person can do is contribute to society in a meaningful way relationship with spirituality is entirely personal, but the core of my beleif is Unity, Equality and Oneness of Mankind that to me is the ultimate goal of humanity but when such a thing will happen is beyond me.

science is trying to further our understanding and figure out things we don't have the answers to, not simply give up in favour of the easy solution (for example, saying God did it and be done with it)

If you read what I wrote before I completeley agree that science is vitally important to humanity and investigation and explanation through earthly means is vital but I see no reason why science and religion cannot agree rather than be opposed. I don't think 'God did it so that's it' and spirituality needs to be investigated as meticulously as science like sungrak said if you haven't looked into it how can you know for sure?

btw, the temple you guys built a little north of chicago is beautiful. seriously. the polygon throws me off a little bit but its a great temple nonetheless

No worries no offense taken

I was born in Chicago and went there as a child but never as an adult I understand it is an impressive sight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
but with that, how can you take any of it seriously? you can't pick and choose which pages you want to take literally.

I also don't see how people can say religious texts are solely metaphorical allegories and stories that are supposed to teach you morals. Have any of you actually read the Old Testament? It's full of stories that don't teach you anything, but rather show you some aspect of God. Like there's a story about two priests? who are transporting the ark and the cart happened to shake a bit and one of them accidentally touched the ark and instantly died. What moral is that supposed to teach? That you shouldn't touch the ark of the covenant? That you shouldn't stumble?

Well the biggest problem I have with a supreme being is that it raises the even bigger question of what created that supreme being.

I think this is a pretty old question and the standard answer is that a supreme being is supreme because no other being created it. Even in polytheistic religions there is the one supreme being who started it all. I guess if you're atheist, you could also ask what caused the anti-symmetry to occur between baryons and anti-baryons that eventually lead to the nucleosynthesis/genesis of the Big Bang?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't skimmed the thread yet, but has anyone gone down the Good/Evil argument? Doesn't actually answer any questions and creates more, but so far it's the bast forum for bringing people to their own conclusions.

Myself personally, I grew up as an Orthodox Jew for most of my life, but did go to church later on and was exposed to Sheiksm after my mom converted (loooooooooooooooong story). I've taken Eastern/Western religion classes and what I've gotten out of it is this: I'm now Agnostic. There's entirely too much confusion to pinpoint who's "right" in this argument, but it's clear to me that there must be some outside force. This doesn't mean that I don't have my doubts from time to time, but when I look around the world and see all of the amazing things, it's hard to believe that it just happened that way. Although that is certainly possible.

At the end of the day, you should probably immerse yourself in some readings about the religions and see where it takes you. I feel that Buddhism (while not a traditional religion) offers some great answers and Hinduism is unbelievably complex and fascinating as well. Check out Taoism for a real mind loop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I assume you believe God to be omniscient and omnipotent? There's no need for him to fight to make things right. He could make things however he wants in an instant.

You're right. If he wanted to do he can make it right. But your judgment of what is right is different from what God judges to be right. Christians don't believe that believing in Christ will give them the perfect life. In fact, many Christians believe in Christ even though they were tortured and killed for it. For example, I personally know somebody who works in North Korea and told me a story once a newly Christian woman who was a ex-concentration/labor camp/prisoner who told her about one random day the guards decided for fun to torture some prisoners. They called out two Christian men, known to ask for punishment instead of really old and young prisonmates, and asked them to denounce their faith or be poured molten iron all over them. They refused and sang praises and hymns and eventually had molten iron poured all over their bodies.

I guess what I wanted to say was that who says that if God existed the universe would be perfect? God can do whatever he pleases even in omnibenevolency. You just don't know how it's omnibenevolent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Like there's a story about two priests? who are transporting the ark and the cart happened to shake a bit and one of them accidentally touched the ark and instantly died. What moral is that supposed to teach? That you shouldn't touch the ark of the covenant? That you shouldn't stumble?

I won't comment on the other part, but if I recall that passage correctly, it was not a priest that touched it, but a Levite. Leviim were the people that got the Cohanim (the priests) ready to go into the temple. The point was that the Ark was so holy that no one except the holiest people could touch it and that was later brought out by stories from Rashi and Unklis where birds would fly over the Ark and be burned up immediately.

Again, not really arguing the allegory perspective, just pointing out what that's about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see no reason why science and religion cannot agree rather than be opposed. I don't think 'God did it so that's it' and spirituality needs to be investigated as meticulously as science like sungrak said if you haven't looked into it how can you know for sure?

they can't agree because religion says God made everything and science says otherwise, simple as that. and just as you said earlier, sungrak cannot tell someone they have to have complete knowledge of every nook and cranny of the universe to come to a conclusion but exempt himself from the same logic

I also don't see how people can say religious texts are solely metaphorical allegories and stories that are supposed to teach you morals. Have any of you actually read the Old Testament? It's full of stories that don't teach you anything, but rather show you some aspect of God.

i didn't say they are solely metaphorical and supposed to teach morals. what i was trying to say was because some of it is, the rest of it loses credibility as fact. i already said i never fully read it. i also think we should end this unless more people want to give their opinions on if there is a god, and why they think so, as per the original post

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
they can't agree because religion says God made everything and science says otherwise, simple as that. and just as you said earlier, sungrak cannot tell someone they have to have complete knowledge of every nook and cranny of the universe to come to a conclusion but exempt himself from the same logic

i love how you selectively cut and paste in order to further your arguments. im pretty sure i addressed this point explicitly not just once, but twice. lol

that being said, lets lock the thread now. the only person who came here with an open mind was jeepster. as with 99.9% of all religious discussion, the only purpose it serves is to allow he who is speaking the ability to preach to the choir and to prove to himself why he is right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fuck, I thought this thread might be interesting, but it is ruined (as was expected) by concentrating on the least interesting part of the whole religion debate. So many people have a narrow scope, it's sad. Get over the idea of any specificity of 'God', and the whole part that deals with physical being and matter is useless. But it also shows how sad the defense of religious people has become. Please just have the fucking guts to nót defend yourself and admit that you have no proof, no rational insight or whatever, but still believe and that you don't care about being rational in that sense either. Please make it a personal thing, have your own rways and choices. Rationality is overrated.;)

Anyway, this is not aimed at anyone specific. But in general people's honest personal reasons for believing that are based on experience are so much more interesting then the clichés; the bible tells us so, the world is to perfect to not be created by a intelligent being, evolution theory is flawed, etc. arguments.

Most of the counter arguments are just as boring and useless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

do they have conversations like this on iss

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fuck, I thought this thread might be interesting, but it is ruined (as was expected) by concentrating on the least interesting part of the whole religion debate. So many people have a narrow scope, it's sad. Get over the idea of any specificity of 'God', and the whole part that deals with physical being and matter is useless. But it also shows how sad the defense of religious people has become. Please just have the fucking guts to nót defend yourself and admit that you have no proof, no rational insight or whatever, but still believe and that you don't care about being rational in that sense either. Please make it a personal thing, have your own rways and choices. Rationality is overrated.;)

Anyway, this is not aimed at anyone specific. But in general people's honest personal reasons for believing that are based on experience are so much more interesting then the clichés; the bible tells us so, the world is to perfect to not be created by a intelligent being, evolution theory is flawed, etc. arguments.

Most of the counter arguments are just as boring and useless.

truth.

95% of christians are horribly versed in defending their faith.

there are some great books out there that do make up for that, but really if i listed them would you care enough to pick one up? if you wouldnt, again youre not investigating the issue with an open mind, instead youre just reading this thread to affirm what you believe by reading the "stupid" things that christians have to say.

further truth is the shameless rhetoric that christians offer up as "evidence" for faith. that goes both ways though. most of the counterarguments offered by secularists are just as contrived and are essentially a rehash of what their 8th grade biology teacher told them and flashes of new scientific research that they read on cnn. few of you if any have every taken a serious consideration of evolution as a theory, of not just its evidence to affirm, but the serious counterarguments that are offered against it (of course i have resources for this as well).

this will be my last post on this issue (atleast in this thread). i love how a good dialogue like this paints me as a fundamentalist, when my atheist buddy studying next to me would never make such a blanket statement about me lol. peace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm personally agnostic, but I think religion is really a good thing for some people. The thing I don't like about religion are generally the extremists who force others in believing what they believe. There were so many wars in history over religion, and in most cases it has caused more harm than good. I also don't like people who use religion as a scare tactic. Saying if you don't follow certain rules, you burn in hell for eternity? What God would want that of his creation? If God is omnipotent, isn't all of our fates pre-determined? He already knows who is going to hell and who isn't, so why bother create people who are already damned?

To me, it seems like wishful thinking. You aren't sure what's going to happen after you're dead, so you hope if you follow certain rules, it will work out for you. I believe, in many ways, religion helps build a person's morals and ethics. If religion can help make people better people, that's all that really matters to me. I would never hate anyone who has religious values, or think of them as stupid or gullable. That is there choice, just as I have my own choices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
do they have conversations like this on iss

haha, i was on iss for like a week last year (i though i was a badass sneaker customizer...which i was lol), and the first thread i ever wrote in was about religion. I mean, as expected this has brought a lot of strong minds out of the woodwork, theirs was more "what does this mean in the bible...well, i think it's bullshit...no, you're bullshit..."yada yada

I can say that this, like every religious debate, may go in circles forever. It came in an odd form (as things usually do) but i found John Mayer's song "Belief" to be a very powerful song when it comes down to religion/war/debate etc, concerning how personal it is:

"belief is a beautiful armor

but makes for the heaviest sword

like punching underwater

you never can hit who you're trying for

some lead the exhibition

and some have to know they tried

it's the chemical weapon

for the war that's raging on inside"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For your information, 99% of "atheists" are in reality just strong agnostics.

75% of all facts are made up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
99% is just a figure of speech meaning the vast majority.

I'm not trying to be combative or argumentative, but I don't see how you can make that claim. There is a clear delineation between Agnostics and Atheists and to make a statement positing that most Atheists are actually Agnostic completely undermines Atheism. My father is a card carrying Atheist with zero belief in the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus, or God. His wife is the same. The friends that they associate with are the same, simply because neither of them can stand people that have a modicum of faith in a higher being.

My point is that I respect their lack of belief and your claim is entirely baseless and insulting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well everyone I have ever encountered in real life or on the internet who is what I would call a scientific non-believer, in that they base their non-belief on religion's unscientific nature, is ultimately a very strong agnostic since god cannot be disproved by science at this time. Anyone who claims that they are 100% sure about the nature of the universe is being just as dogmatic as fundamentalist theists and deserves no more respect in my view, although I may agree with most of their beliefs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

can we avoid arguments and stick to personal statements?

stories like the one diewhitegirls told are far more interesting to me than the arguments/rebuttals already rehashed hundreds of times over in every internet forum since time immemorial

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well everyone I have ever encountered in real life or on the internet who is what I would call a scientific non-believer, in that they base their non-belief on religion's unscientific nature, is ultimately a very strong agnostic since god cannot be disproved by science at this time. Anyone who claims that they are 100% sure about the nature of the universe is being just as dogmatic as fundamentalist theists and deserves no more respect in my view, although I may agree with most of their beliefs.

You're 100% right that science cannot disprove God, but remember that the burden of proof is proving that he does exist, not that he doesn't exist. Does it make one side more correct than the other? Of course not. Just because something hasn't been explained doesn't make it incorrect. I had this argument with my father:

Me: In the 1600's, did anyone believe that we could land on the moon?

Dad: Yes, but there was no clear understanding of how.

Me: Did their lack of belief hinder human beings from landing on the moon?

Dad: Ultimately, no, but it may have set back progress.

Me: Then by that logic, as a scientific minded human being (which he is), shouldn't you allow the argument for god as a valid forum in conversation since it may be eventually proven that he does exist?

That was the only time that my father had nothing to say. For a few second anyway, because he proved that my analogy was bad due to the fact that all that was lacking was technology as both humans and the moon existed. Anyway, the point of that story was that until human beings proved that they could make it to the moon, they couldn't make it to the moon. The burden of proof lies with the claimant. I saw that on Judge Judy once.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the thing with me. I believe in evolution and god, if that makes any sense. So, I guess what I'm trying to say is, I believe in god, but I also believe that the bible is wrong. Simply because I believe god put something on the earth(apes?), but then whatever it was evelved into the modern being of today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If anyone wants to discuss the Old Testament thoroughly and to some extent the New Testament, I'd love to discuss this. I spent 13 years studying this stuff, so to actually put it to some use would be fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really care if God exists. I guess that qualifies me as an agnostic or even absurdist.

I think I have two problems with religion as I see it practiced. Firstly, I believe in absolute accountability in my actions. If I fail at something, I don't think that "it was part of a greater plan". I know that it was my own failing and I should own up to it. I think that in this sense, religion and the concept of God (whether he exists or not) is simply a way to escape personal responsibility. For many it's necessary, but when I see it, it just bothers me.

Secondly, I don't think my morality should be dictated by some scripture. I act with decency towards other individuals and believe I should respect others. Fuck the looming threat of hell because I don't pray five times a day or because I drink.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this