scott: dude, you're making all of us Christians look bad. seriously....stop. youre not helping anyone here. the more you talk the more ignorant you make your faith sound.
to the atheists: the only real problem i have with atheism is that you dont believe in anything.....and i cant wrap my head around that. i can understand agnostics who say "hey, i dont know whats up there", but to say "nope, nothing is above us and thats that" just doesnt do it for me.
now dont get me wrong...if you dont want to believe then thats your choice. but how can you ignore the infinite complexities of our existence? how can you leave that all up to random chance? i say that
something else has to be out there......whether you call it God, Jehovah, Allah, Rama, Shiva, FSM, or an alien race that put us here, it doesnt matter. SOMEthing has to have helped in creating all of it.
and yes..that basically just restated my original post from a month ago. so far no one has said anything to tell me WHY they dont believe in anything, although ive skipped all the back and forth between anyone and scoot because it got old fast.
Quote:
now dont get me wrong...if you dont want to believe then thats your choice. but how can you ignore the infinite complexities of our existence? how can you leave that all up to random chance? i say that something else has to be out there......whether you call it God, Jehovah, Allah, Rama, Shiva, FSM, or an alien race that put us here, it doesnt matter. SOMEthing has to have helped in creating all of it.
I went to church. Hell, I even was baptized. The thing about what triggered my athiestic way of mind is that religion didn't make sense.
If the xian god was all knowing, it didn't matter what I did or what I chose, my fate was sealed (otherwise that negates being all-knowing). This is contradictory to the free-will aspect also taught by the churches ("repent and you will be saved" is the short version). It can't be both. An omniscient being will already know who is and is not going to repent.
If there this one inconsistency in a book that is supposed to be "divine truth", how many more would there be? In my opinion, it is a faith based in lies.
But, since this is not a free will argument...
Casey Schaaf wrote:I just prefer to live my own life, not catering to an unproven idea.
I like this guy's thoughts.
Simple yet sum my feelings up.
Kardain said
"Who controls the content of the LBoLPTWtTfTB that you believe in? Hmm.... I think it is the RCC, unless you are Jewish or Mormon, which have their own interpretation."
I don't think you really have a clue as to what you are talking about. For some reason, some people think that the Roman Catholic Church is some kind of governing body that determines what goes on in other churches (non-RCC)
The Bible I use is the authorized King James Version, out of which, the New Testament was translated from the original Koine Greek language, that was spoken and written at the time of Christ. The RCC did not approve of this translation. Aside from their clergy, the RCC didn't want people to read the Bible for themselves. They had to go to mass and hear it read in Latin, which they couldn't understand.
The KJV wasn't the first English Translation, using the Textus Receptus greek translation.
The old testament, GAM, was translated from the Masoretic text, or in some newer versions, the Septuagent. Also, I'm not going to ague the flat earth/ edges anymore. Its beating a dead horse with you. I said read the text as a whole. If the entire passage is written in metaphorical form, then thats how you take it. In the case of the water into wine, Jesus went to a wedding in Canaan, and turned the water into wine. The entire passage is a literal telling of events.
Tabs, you left the field of battle a long time ago, so don't come back now and whine. And in case you haven't figured it out, they aren't going to be convinced. Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaketh, and its obvious at this point what's in there. And, Tabs, are you worried that they might not like you, (internet friendships, see my sig), or because you are genuinely concerned for their eternal souls?
And y'all can call the Bible whatever gets your motor revving. Same as it doesn't offend me when people call in a book of fairy tales. You atheism acolytes have been the ones hopping mad and, flinging insults, and chasing rabbits. Enjoying yourself yet? I hope so, because I'm having a great time pouring over these posts.
.
“Poor Al Gore. Global warming completely debunked via the very Internet you invented. Oh, oh, the irony!” -Jon Stewart
ScottaWhite wrote:
Tabs, you left the field of battle a long time ago, so don't come back now and whine. And in case you haven't figured it out, they aren't going to be convinced. Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaketh, and its obvious at this point what's in there. And, Tabs, are you worried that they might not like you, (internet friendships, see my sig), or because you are genuinely concerned for their eternal souls?
first off, nowhere was i whining. but you arent making much sense at all ---> and this is coming from someone who shares the same faith as you. you either dont realize or dont care that when you ramble on, fighting tooth and nail every step of the way, that you are actually pushing these people away more than anything else. you come across as a crazed, Bible thumping idiot, and its that type of demeanor that makes all Christians look bad.
secondly, how would my post even begin to indicate that im worried what other people think of me? if i was then i wouldnt have posted, especially on the underdog's side. sure, im concerned for everyone's eternal souls. but it comes down to choice. if they dont want to hear, then that alleviates me from any responsibility to tell them. its not my or any other Christian's place to force feed what we believe on others. we are supposed to be there for those who want to hear it. that seems to be one of the many areas that youre mixed up on.
kardain: i believe adamantly that we all have free will. just because a higher power knows what we are going to choose doesnt make it any less our choice. so yes, i believe we are predetermined to either heaven or hell, but that we dont know what it is because we havent made our choices yet. since God is all knowing, yes, it has already been done (in God's time). but because we havent made those choices yet, they havent been done (in our eyes or time or whatever).
Edited 1 time(s). Last edited Sunday, March 16, 2008 7:20 PM
Then explain to me how it is that the Latin Vulgate Canon, The King James and the
Douay and Reims New Testament translations converge so well? Could it be, that they were both taken from precisely the same texts? The only differences is that they were translated by people with different agendas. The KJV is foot-noted pretty clearly, just as the Douay is.
As far as flat earth: I had alluded to the fact that if you read it without inflection or personal slant, Job, Isaiah, and Daniel all pretty much agree that the world is flat. If you had been reading the Bible in an age during Calvinism, you'd be thinking that dirty bastard Galileo was in League with the Papists... even when he was formally excommunicated. The prevailing idea in the time that Job was written was that the earth was a short column, and that the equator was impassable to the other side of the earth. If you don't want to believe it.. .hell that's fine, you seem to believe you're right on other things without due support, why should this be any different.
As far aethism, You might as well believe you're right too: no one has come back from death to tell about it yet, so, if you want to believe in the almighty, go ahead. I just hope a life time of not worshipping on the proper Sabbath as set out by God was worth the time and effort.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
ScottaWhite wrote:Kardain said
"Who controls the content of the LBoLPTWtTfTB that you believe in? Hmm.... I think it is the RCC, unless you are Jewish or Mormon, which have their own interpretation."
I don't think you really have a clue as to what you are talking about. For some reason, some people think that the Roman Catholic Church is some kind of governing body that determines what goes on in other churches (non-RCC)
.
Ok, I'll give you that my statment was not 100% accurate, but since you are so hell-bent on defending the accuracy of your holy book, defend these:
POLITICAL LEADERS: Luke 1:5 states that Jesus was born when Herod was King of Judea. Luke 2:2 states that Jesus was born when Cyrenius (a.k.a. Quirinius) was also governor of Syria. Unfortunately, this appears to be an impossibility. The historical record shows that Herod was king from 37 until his death in 4 BCE. (A few scholars say 5 BCE). Quirinius was not governor of Syria at any time during this period. He came to power in 6 CE, a decade after Herod died.
CENSUS/TAXATION: Luke 2:1-4 mentions that Jesus' birth occurred during the time that Caesar Augustus had ordered all of the known world to be taxed. Luke said that every person had to return to the city of his ancestors, to be registered and taxed. Joseph went to Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David. But this universal census and tax never actually happened. The Jewish historian Josephus wrote a very complete history of the Jews in Palestine. He does mention a census which was conducted in Judea in 6 CE. But this was only a local census, not one that would enable "all the world to be taxed." Its purpose was to count the male population so that they could be taxed at a later time. And it triggered a major uprising among the Jews, who regarded a census as against scripture and the will of god. He does not refer to an earlier census and poll tax.
At the time of Jesus' birth, the Jews were still subject to King Herod. Since Palestine was a client kingdom of Rome, only the king had powers of taxation in the land. It was only in areas that were operated under direct Roman rule that Caesar Augustus could have taxed the citizens directly. There is no record of a mass migration of adults to their ancestral cities in order to be registered. It would have been totally impractical to hold a census in this way. The primitive transportation systems of the Roman Empire would have been totally inadequate to handle the flow of people. The entire empire would be largely shut down for many months while people were returning to their home towns. Even today, with airplanes, trains, buses and automobiles, it would not be practical to hold a census in this manner.
HEROD'S SLAUGHTER OF THE INNOCENTS: Matthew 2:16 describes King Herod's order that all of the boy infants who had not reached their second birthday in Bethlehem and vicinity were to be murdered. The date of that mass murder would give an approximate idea of Jesus' birth. Unfortunately for historians (and fortunately for the residents of the Bethlehem area) the killings never happened. If the children were killed, then historians of the era would have been certain to have recorded the event. Josephus would have been one. He wrote in great detail about even minor actions and decisions of Herod. The mass murder was never mentioned.
I'll come back with more later...
tabs wrote:kardain: i believe adamantly that we all have free will. just because a higher power knows what we are going to choose doesnt make it any less our choice. so yes, i believe we are predetermined to either heaven or hell, but that we dont know what it is because we havent made our choices yet. since God is all knowing, yes, it has already been done (in God's time). but because we havent made those choices yet, they havent been done (in our eyes or time or whatever).
... which in turn does not define free-will.
If someone is predestined to heaven or hell, regardless of the choices one makes, that is the end result. Even taking the end result out of the equation, an omniscient being knows whether or not you will read this post. Since result X is known by an outside source, you are no longer in control of your own existence.
think of it like this: if you were able to travel back in time and did so, but did not interfere (you could be an inetheral visitor, not like michael j fox) and you were to go back to, say, 1980 when reagan was shot. you would know everything that was going to happen, even though the people who were doing those things didnt. would that nullify their decisions and free will just because you KNEW what was going to transfire? not at all.
by that same extension a higher power does not make decisions FOR you, even though they know what you are going to make. another way of thinking about it is that we have already made our choices, we are now going through and actually doing them. the thing is that we dont consciously know what they are, so they are a surprise to us, but not to someone who is outside our time frame or time line.
of course this is getting off the subject of atheism....but from the way things have been going, maybe thats a good thing
Quote:
would that nullify their decisions and free will just because you KNEW what was going to transfire? not at all.
Assuming a non-interfering, ethereal being, by definition, the choice they make will always be the one that will be in the history book. Since you probably did your homework beforehand, you would have knowledge of whatever choice they decided to make, making you partially omniscient and negating their free-will.
(tabs) wrote: another way of thinking about it is that we have already made our choices, we are now going through and actually doing them.
Yeah I don't think so. You are saying that our choices are made for us already and that we have to follow them, meaning I don't actually have control, which is what I don't like.
I have been an Atheist since I was 12. One day religion just didn't make since to me. I would ask questions and got no strait answer.The typical answer is you just have to have faith in god. After years of hearing that B.S. answer I just gave up. Now my parents are not the most church going folk either but they did respect my decision after a while.
I do hate telling people that I am atheist because they always seem to think they need to save you. It just ends up pissing me off when they can't take a hint and I end up tell them they are weak minded and need to really research there religion (Which I have). Which is also the main reason I don't believe.
At the time of Jesus there are about 5 other five other figures that also claimed to be the son of god. There is even mention of one of them in the bible (yes i have read bible). One thing that god me as a kid was they always told me the bible was written from the words of god. But there are so my versions of the bible. What can the mythical figure in the sky can't make up his mind on the story he wants to tell you.
But really this video has a lot of thing I found myself and many I didn't even know about.
Part 1
part2
part 3
Why Be An Atheist? mmmmmmmmmmmmm
How about this....... BECAUSE GOD DOESN'T EXIST
Seriousley though.... who really cares..... what ever it is thats going to happen to you when you die is going to happen regardless of what you believe in..... the after life (if there is one) isn't going to be different for you just because you believe something else to be true.
2 opposing viewpoints cannot rightfully claim to be true. One of us is wrong. Even if I was an acolyte of atheism, I think I might want to err on the side of prudence and caution. Wouldn't it be a kick in the pants to wake up in hell and be like "crap". Have a nice day.
.
“Poor Al Gore. Global warming completely debunked via the very Internet you invented. Oh, oh, the irony!” -Jon Stewart
Actually, Scott: 2 Diametrically opposed can both be wrong (there's not just 2 sides on a coin, there's always at least 3, just like people's stories, there's your version, their version, and what actually happened).
Plus, if you're erring on the side of caution, you're not really believing, either. Deal with the here and now, and let tomorrow happen in it's own good time.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
Au Contraire, Scott. The glass is hlaf empty, half full, too tall, and there's not enough water for the glass all at the same time.
Goodbye Callisto & Skađi, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
I'm Athiest, though I'm not about to prove anything. Hell the idea of god, itself, has yet to be proven. Until it does, I have more important things to worry about. Besides, mother Mary still owes me close to a grand from our one night stand in Las Vegas, that bitch.
-Markus
2002 Yellow Cavalier LS Sport
ScottaWhite wrote:2 opposing viewpoints cannot rightfully claim to be true. One of us is wrong. Even if I was an acolyte of atheism, I think I might want to err on the side of prudence and caution. Wouldn't it be a kick in the pants to wake up in hell and be like "crap". Have a nice day.
.
Fail. As it was mentioned earlier by someone else, Pascal's Wager is a crock. Plus, as Gam and Keeper pointed out, there aren't only two viewpoints. Neither of us could be right.
maybe some people just dont give a @!#$ whether there is something there or not, which is why they dont think about the infinite possibilities as to why we are here, i know im one of those people that really dont give a @!#$, this is why im an atheist. But whos to say we are the only ones out in space? i bet theres many many other beings out there but we just dont know of them. so to say we are here by small chance, might not even be correct.
The only difference between religion and science = proof.
Science is everything we have fiqured out...... and religion is all the crap we don't understand yet.
People used to belive that there was a god of rain,,, and a god of wind..... know we know better.
One day... when we have the ability to actualy know 100% what happens to us when we die... religion will pretty much be gone....
I'm a firm believer that if the afterlife is a real place.... we will eventually be able to see, interact, or visit it without dying through science..... anything "real" is also tangeble.
I personally think that organized religion is a bad thing.... it honestly doesn't do that much good..... but it sure does start a lot of wars.
So I dont have to listen to all this oppressive religious bull@!#$
I dont "worship" anything, I'm not anyones slave. I'm a human @!#$ being and I live my own life how I want.
1989 Turbo Trans Am #82, 2007 Cobalt SS G85
The problem with religion (all of them) and ideology (liberal and conservative, I make no distinction between either) is simply that, after a while, people begin to think that their beliefs are perfect and self-evident and that only fools wouldn't come around to their way of thinking. Some go even further and think that only people whose hearts are filled with pure evil wouldn't believe in what they believe.
And the reason that people are so anxious and frightened about differing beliefs is that they're such doubting sheep that they need other people to believe in the same thing too in order to fully embrace their faith in whatever it is that they choose to follow. and when they see someone who doesn't then it causes a small seed of doubt that just won't go away no matter how much they pray (or listen to Al Gore's speeches if they're on the other side of the spectrum) so they feel a real pressing need to eliminate all dissent.
Intresting post, Knox. Hit a lot of salient points. People are, as a general rule, a communal specie, and loke to see themselves as perfection. Anything different clouds that idea of perfection and leaves, as you put it, doubt. Religion, being a big intangible, doesn't have a definite proof of validity, and as such, since there's no proof or disproof, it comes down to one person's perception aganst another's and when you get two strong-willed people against each others with enough force of personality to get others to march unquestioningly lockstep with them bad things do happen.
Unfortunately, it also means that those that simply don't give a crap are threats, because, well, it might give the "flock" bad ideas and erode the base of power.
Really, Weebel, I think you're misleading yourself in thinking that we will eventually know everything. We'll likley be extinct long before then. Plus, even science is dependent of reference frames and perspective. more modern science tried to take that into account, but really, even the instruments made to give precise measurements are calibrated by humans who have a relative perception, and as such, while precise and accurate for mosty human constructys, are still not aboslute.
I'll try to be simple. A simple form of measurement--a meter. What defines a meter? Every single way to define a meter somehow distills down to perception along some way, shape, or form. Someone defened a meter based on their perception of a percieved constant, and for our usage, it doesn't really matter since the machines to calibrate things that can measure in meters are basically the same give or take a very tight tolerance based on that perception, but in the absolute, it's still a form of perception. Since humans cannot (and IMNSHO will never be able to) percieve things in the absolute, it's all based on our perception.
Thus, science has only proved things within, along the broadest sense, things within the overall human perception, and there are perceptions outside of the human perception in which what holds true--or even fact for us doesn't apply.
To us, sugar is sweet. Not to your cat--it can't taste sweet. From the cat's perspective, we're either believing in a concept (sweetness) that really doesn't exist, or since the specie of cat can't perceive sweetness, then once it discovers that new paradigm, it will blow holes in a lot of cat theories
For all we know, God could exist. For all we know, many gods could exist.
Goodbye Callisto & Skađi, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
Quote:
to the atheists: the only real problem i have with atheism is that you dont believe in anything.....and i cant wrap my head around that. i can understand agnostics who say "hey, i dont know whats up there", but to say "nope, nothing is above us and thats that" just doesnt do it for me.
And thats the same way all atheist feel about others, how can they believe that there is a higher being..something that monitors every human being on the planet, that there is a heaven or hell.
to me anyways, our lives are countless lucky coincidences that more than likely replicate through out the literal infinite universe, there is an immeasurable amount of space and matter and rock and suns and galaxies to assume that we are the only ones because someone said so....
Something to spark a bit more fuel into this--and I'm going to pick on you, Robbie
You said before that an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent being basically negates free will. Not necessarily.
Assuming there is an absolute god (Monotheism) as opposed to a higher being (most pantheism), this absolute god doesn't necessarily have to know which choice you make--tremeber, it would have to be operating at a perception level that we cannot fathom. It's plausible, then that, it knows every choice avaliable to everyone, and knows all possible outcomes. As such, if we simplify this down to a simple 2-option choice for one person, let's say whether or not the next time Scott takes a dump, whether he wipes front-to-back or back-to front, this god would know what happens along both options--how his life would unfold in both cases--kinda like looking at a flowchart. Of chouce, you'd have to add all possible choices that all possible beings will be faced with and the interactions thereof.
As such, it's possible that God, if God exists as the Monotheists claim God does, could exist as God does and not negate free will. It's more like our limited perception can only experience one outcome rather than all possible outcomes. As such, in my example, Scott wipes front to back and enjoys a life of fame and fortune, but ends up getting launched from a pillow factory and hit by a marshmallow truck and dies, and sent to limbo since he wasn't really bad, but not necessarlity good. Say he wipes back to front, and because of that, he wids up destitute, but a pious soul, and dies when he's on the street corner taking a whizz, and a dog comes up from behind him, cold-noses him, where he cracks his head on the building and dies from exposure. But he's pious, so he ends up in heaven. From God's point of views, there are essentially an infinite number of Scotts that are spawned from all of his descsions and how he's acted on them, and where they end up ranges fromheaven, hell, limbo, purgatory, on someone's roof, a garage in Buffalo, or reincarnated as Jessia Alba's leotard, and everything in between. It's just the choices he's made determine what his perception would experience.
However, this does assume that somehow if God was aboslute, he could take a relative stance and not negate himself at all, which kinda blows holes in the theory that God is absolute in the christian sense.
Goodbye Callisto & Skađi, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
Keeper..... I understand what your saying.....
I personally don't think we will ever have the technology I spoke of either......
I don't consider myself a religious person from the standpoint of any organized religions..... but I do see myself as somewhat of an elightened person and religouse in my own ways.. although re reading what I've posted... I can see how I sound like a full blown aithiest.
The perspective thing you where talking about makes a lot of sence... and its the root of a common point I try to make.
The problem with defining god, good, evil, and the afterlife in our current existence is that it can't be properly defined in our world in a way that we can understand it... we don't have the perspective to understand it...
The idea that most religions try to explain.... cannot be explained in words.... there is no way that we can understand gods will.... assuming there is a god..... it would be like an ant trying to understand the workings of an internal combustion engine....
Instead of trying to fiqure things out... and making a list..... just do what you feel is right....... we are not givin the gift (or burden) of knowing such things.... but we are givin the ability to have a conception of right and wrong (or good an evil) to give us a guidline to live on...... basically.... if you know something is messed up or wrong... don't do it.
When was the last time one of you held the door for an old lady you've never met?
The meaning of life? well thats an easy one..... and if you can't figure it out on your own... you wont understand..... but the reason we are here? ... there is no reason..... other than to exist.... something either has to exist or not exist.... and we just happen to be one of the things that do. As for the afterlife..... we will all know one day.... and no book written by somebody that hasn't been there can tell you.... Don't worry about what happens when you die.... everything will be fine..... death is as natural as birth.... we where not here before we where born... and we won't be after we die..... wehter we go back to where we where before that, or go somewhere else..... who knows..... but we came from what we concieve as nothing but we are here..... so when we go back.... it'll be nothing new.
It's all really simple..... you just need to close you eyes and listen (but not with your ears).....
