{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Edited by BiasedMilkHotel:
4/27/2014 11:51:29 PM
35
-
Lolurstupid
-
Spaghetti and meatballs are -blam!-ing tasty /debate
-
Edited by Corvus Prudens: 2/20/2013 5:34:53 AMNo, a book itself is not evidence. The contents of the book are, however. By your logic, evolution is false because it is contained within a book. And besides, a little logic could benefit your whole post. I can disprove the existence of spiderman form outside sources and from within by means of logical contradictions. I cannot necessarily disprove evolution by such means. Additionally, does not the theory of evolution scream "ALL RELIGIONS ARE FALSE?" P.S. Are you not also shoving your belief down my throat that all religions scream such things?
-
By shoving it down someone's throat, I mean people going out of their way to constantly tell people that "herp derp my beliefs are right yours are wrong convert to my religion plz", not simply saying "I'm an atheist here's why it's cool to be theist or agnostic though" Second, The Origin of Species detailed the theory of evolution AND gave Darwin's reasons as to why he believed in it. (He gave proof) Most religious texts simply say how the author believed how the universe and life came to be, maybe why certain things (Rain, death, etc.) happen. Also, evolution doesn't conflict with all other religious beliefs. One way to look at it is that the deity(s) of your choice made life, left for a couple millenias, came back and saw that humans had developed from the proto life forms, so he/she decided to give them some rules, guidance, and an aftelrlife. Or maybe the religious text of your choice got edited and mistranslated over the years, losing the creator's original message.
-
Edited by Corvus Prudens: 2/20/2013 10:49:04 PMNo, it does not directly conflict with most religions, but let's be specific here. It does not directly conflict with the Bible story. I'm not saying that it does, but the majority of evolutionists don't believe in a creator. A creation without a god requires some form of abiogenesis, which has never been documented. Therefore the theory of evolution is incomplete, and basing an entire belief system upon it seems foolish to me. Darwin gave scientific evidence, not proof; there is no proof in science. Christianity is a religion firmly based in historical fact; there is the Bible--with no internal contradictions--and outside sources which point to its historicity. What you are left with are questions about its divinity, i.e. was Christ the son of God, as he said? You have three logical answers: he was crazy, he was a liar, or he was telling the truth. Now, let me quote from thee book [i]Evidence That Demands A Verdict[/i] concerning if he was a liar: "....The answer, of course, is that Jesus could not have! Someone who lived as Jesus lived, taught as Jesus taught, and died as Jesus died could not be a liar." Also, concerning his lunacy: ....No lunatic could be the source of such perceptive and effective psychological insight. C.S. Lewis is right. No other explanation but the Christian one will do: "The historical difficulty of giving for the life, sayings and influence of Jesus any explanation that is not harder than the Christian explanation is very great. The discrepancy between the depth and sanity and (let me add) [i]shrewdness[/i] of His moral teachings and the rampant megalomania which must lie behind His theological teachings unless he is indeed God, has never been satisfactorily got over. Hence the non-Christian hypotheses succeed one another with the restless fertility of bewilderment." Tell me how this is not based in solid evidence.
-
People tend to be biased when writing about themselves. All we know about Jesus Christ is what the Bible says, which is simply a book. For all we know, if Jesus existed he could have added a bunch of bullshit to his life story to make himself seem like a golden saint. There's no evidence that Jesus actually lived like he did in the Bible, besides the Bible itself. One thing that irks me though is that the Vatican and the church has been very corrupt during certain eras (Such as during the rennasaince when they sold forgiveness to sins to rich people, and members of the corrupt Borgia family somehow became the Pope.) How could have God let his priests do that kind of stuff? Why didn't he stop the corrupt priests? Heck, why doesn't he just come out and show us all that he exists, disproving all other beliefs definitively?
-
Ah, great questions. To answer the first, Jesus himself did not write the New Testament. He had men--both his disciples and other men--write them. The four Gospels were written in 60 A.D. (which must be thirty years after Jesus' death.) The fact that four men remembered nearly identical events seems to point to truth. For them to remember Jesus hoaxes would be quite difficult, just as the liar finds at the courtroom. Let me paraphrase from this handy-dandy book here: Over the past few years, many Christian doctrines have been challenged. Concerning Jesus there have been three main 'quests' to disprove the historicity of Jesus. [I will now quote directly:] Gary Habermas states: "There have been many popular attempts to discredit the Jesus of the Gospels. Even in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries these attempts were prevalent. While they have been rejected almost unanimously by careful scholars, especially those who remember similar attempts disproven long ago, they still receive widespread attention among laypeople [I'm not saying you're a layperson.] You don't have to take this man's word; you can fully research the topic yourself if you really want to know the truth. I could also give you more evidence tomorrow, if you want. As for the Catholic church, you are completely correct; they were despicable. The few men in power of the church most often abused it for money and pleasure, or whatever else. This very same thing happened to the Jewish Pharisees as well. Before the coming of Christ, they had twisted the Law of Moses into a mess, and used their positions for pride and power. Nonetheless, the Catholic teachings seem to be skewed, even without such odious crimes. For example, they believe that one must pray to the Virgin Mary of the Saints for forgiveness of sins, while the Bible expressly says to ask forgiveness of sins only from God. They also have strange and useless rituals and other things which simply cloud the words of the Bible. I do not know why God would let such things transpire, but then, he allowed the Jews--according to the Bible--to suffer greatly because of their sins, so perhaps a similar thing occurred. However, the Catholic church did do one thing right; they expertly copied the bible for years, keeping it nearly perfect to the original, when it almost certainly would have been lost otherwise. Perhaps that was their purpose. Perhaps. Now, the reason I believe that God would not simply show himself is that it would force the issue; it would eradicate the free will we have now. If he showed himself, you can surely bet a lot that Most men would believe in him. However, they would not have sought him, searched for him, or perhaps even given him thought before he showed himself. That is, however, what he wants from us; the creator wants the created to find him on their own, for that is their purpose. Find him and love him. In the Bible it is said that: "Many will travel upon the wide road to the gates of hell, but few will find the narrow path to the gates of heaven," however, "Those who seek will find."
-
Except with evolution, there's evidence and support of its existence.
-
I don't know anything about evolution, but aren't humans a very good example of evolution?
-
Oh, and there's no evidence of a Christian God?
-
No there isnt, since its a fallacy for him to exist.
-
Why is it a fallacy?
-
>All loving god >All powerful god >Sin >free will >lol
-
Your post gave no evidence...for anything.
-
It isnt about evidence, its about logic. You cannot have an all loving all powerful god that allows sin and free will, its impossible.
-
Yes, you can. Let's put it this way: he created human beings, and therefore he loves them. He created them so that they might love him, but to do that he had to give them free will. One cannot be commanded to love, for the love would be false; it must be from the heart. However, with free will comes choice, and the possibility of disobedience. Thus humans disobeyed and followed their desires, which led to a 'sin' filled world. He still loves all of us, but gives rewards to those who love him in return, for that was their only purpose. And now we have an all-loving, all-powerful god that allows sin and free will.
-
An all knowing god cannot allow beings he creates to have free will, for he would know everything they did before hand. An all loving, all knowing god, would not allow sin to exist, because he is all loving, he would know that sin would take place, and he would be the one who damns them to hell.
-
It seems that you have never read the Bible. He would know everything they did beforehand, but what does it matter? The actions of the humans would still be their own. And why would he not allow sin? It is the only way to true love. If men did not sin, then they would have no free choice, and thus could not love their creator. A robot programmed to love does not love out of choice. An all-knowing god of the Jews, Yahweh, made the men pay for their sins, which he knew they would commit, with the slaughter of some innocent creature--usually a spotless, firstborn male lamb. This was only a temporary solution for salvation; it showed men that they could not save themselves and thus needed another to save them all. That was the purpose of the death of Jesus, which you may have learned in Sunday school. One perfect man to pay for the sins of all. Thus, any who believe in the life and death of Jesus--along with the reality of their own sin--are saved in the Christian religion. I see no reason to believe that and all-loving god could not allow sin.
-
Actually i have read the old and the new as a child, and i was a youth group leader before coming into my own beliefs, so you attempting to discredit my ability to judge Christianity, or other religions i have studied is pathetic. You ability to ignore logic is stellar sir. lets try this again shall we. Is you god All powerful? >Yes This would suggest he knows everything that will happen, no matter what. This means man cannot have freewill as their fates are known, their decisions planned out by the god that knows said fates, since he is all powerful, he could choose to change said fates, but he doesn't. You say you god is all loving? >yes Then why would he destine men to murder and kill, her created everything, including men, and since he knows everything to happen, and didn't change these mans fates, he choose for them to murder kill and molest. So we have a supposed all loving all powerful god, that allows free will, but chooses for men to commit heinous acts, and as you previously stated, he only created man so that man could love him. Do you not see where others are coming from, or will you pull that blanket of ignorance closer to your body for the warm embrace of your religion? I mean even all powerful has some connotations to it that would cause fallacy. Can god create a rock he cannot move? Can he create a beings whose future he doesn't know? Can he create an object he could never see? Yes or no to any of those, makes him not all powerful.
-
Wow, let's just get testy here then. Let me first ask you this; was the only reason you left Christianity because you found it illogical? Also, I have logic of my own which you ignore and call idiotic. Please pay attention. You are also applying a human understanding to a being which we are not and will never be. It is like attempting to hold up the laws of physics inside a black hole; it does not work. To the first question: yes, he is all powerful. Though the fates of men are known by this god, they still, in their understanding, choose as far as they can. To the second, I have found a bit of C.S. Louis that I will quote here: If a good God made the world why has it gone wrong? And for many years I simply refused to listen to the Christian answers to this question, because I kept on feeling 'whatever you say, and however clever your arguments are, isn't it much simpler and easier to say that the world was not made by any intelligent power? Aren't all your arguments simply a complicated attempt to avoid the obvious?' But then that threw me back into another difficulty. My argument against God was that the universe seemed so crule and unjust. But how had I got this idea of [i]just[/i] and [i]unjust?[/i] A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust? If the whole show was bad and senseless from A to Z, so to speak, why did I, who was supposed to part of the show, find myself in such violent reaction against it? A man feels wet when he falls into water, becaus man is not a water animal: a fish would not feel wet. Of course I could have given up my idea of justice by saying it was nothing but a private idea of my own. But if I did that, then my argument against God collapsed too--for the argument depended on saying that the world was really unjust, not simply that it did not happen to please my fancies. Thus in the very act of trying to prove that God did not exist--in other words, that the whole of reality was senseless--I found I was forced to assume that on part of reality--namely my idea of justice--was full of sense. Consequently atheism turns out to be too simple. If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning: just as, if there were no light in the universe and thereofre no creatures with eyes, we should never know it was dark. [i]Dark[/i] would be a word without meaning. Maybe you should consider this as well.
-
And you have found the biggest underlying issue i have with all religion, specifically abrahamic, or the big three. If, and a big if, there is a god, how is it that men, who wrote all these books, can understand what a god wants?
-
Lol people still believe in the BigBang...
-
/facepalm
-
God gave us a set of laws to obey, by speaking through man. Our obedience to these laws and belief in His Son are all He asks for.
-
Edited by Capiton Render: 2/20/2013 9:28:32 PMSPEAKING THROUGH MAN >Nope, no chance for abuse there /facepalm
