NationStates Jolt Archive

Erm, erm...how can I put this without offending people...fuck it, I'll just say it how I see it.

It's my belief that religions are just a load of superstitious nonsense and those that believe in them were brainwashed as a child or are just delusional or stupid. All these tales about God can't possibly be true. Of course, I'm sure that a few of you believe differently. But one of us has to be wrong, am I right? ;)

Anyway, I'll be making a poll to find out when most of you religious types first started to believe in fairies. I suspect most of you were taught at a young age by your parents. Maybe I'm wrong though, maybe you weren't brainwashed by your family and other religious nutjobs. If it turns out that all of you made an informed decision to believe in God as an adult, then I just might convert...

Don't hold your breath though, that's not likely to happen. I didn't make any promises. *Runs away*

odd question

i've never believed in fairies. i dont think i ever even believed in the tooth fairy.

what does that have to do with religion?

I didn't find religion. I had it semi-forced on me from an early age until I lost it.

A lot of the christians I know (including my parents) were not Christians when they were young.

However they were both seeking answers, and when they were looking for meaning in their lives they both felt touched by God and everything apparently becamse so clear. Seek and you shall find apparently.

Don't listen to what a bunch of ignorant fucks tell you, because most of the people who I know who were indoctrinated into christianity as a child became athiests when they grew up. And the majority of Christians do not become christian because of this intelligent design idea, that just gives them reassurance.

I hope that clears things up for you.

I was introduced to Christianity (the good kind) when I was about 8, by my stepmother. I went to church, I said all the right things, I did the god thing, but I was never really convinced.

But there came a single time, when I was about 14, that, to me, proved God's existence.

Erm, erm...how can I put this without offending people...fuck it, I'll just say it how I see it.

It's my belief that religions are just a load of superstitious nonsense and those that believe in them were brainwashed as a child or are just delusional or stupid. All these tales about God can't possibly be true. Of course, I'm sure that a few of you believe differently. But one of us has to be wrong, am I right? ;)

Anyway, I'll be making a poll to find out when most of you religious types first started to believe in fairies. I suspect most of you were taught at a young age by your parents. Maybe I'm wrong though, maybe you weren't brainwashed by your family and other religious nutjobs. If it turns out that all of you made an informed decision to believe in God as an adult, then I just might convert...

Don't hold your breath though, that's not likely to happen. I didn't make any promises. *Runs away*

In the US, roughly 90% of religious individuals belong to the same denomination as their parents. Not just the same faith (i.e. Christian, Jewish), but the same denomination (i.e. Methodist, Reform).

Whether or not this reflects "brainwashing" is an interesting question. Statistically speaking, children will reject their parents' political beliefs quite often. Children will virtually always show significant differences of opinion on social matters (i.e. gay marriage, racial issues) when compared with their parents, since there tends to be a progressive shift with each new generation. However, religious belief does not appear to work the same way. Even children who reject their parents' political ideology will still be very likely to retain the "religious orientation" they were reared to.

I find that very interesting. If children are really "brainwashed" into religious belief, why doesn't this appear to happen with other areas? (Or, at least, why does it happen to a much lesser degree?)

odd question

i've never believed in fairies. i dont think i ever even believed in the tooth fairy.

what does that have to do with religion?

fairy (IMAGINARY CREATURE)
an imaginary creature with magical powers, usually represented as a very small person with wings:

While I don't know of any gods that are represented as a very small people with wings, it is my belief that gods are simply imaginary creatures with magical powers.

Oh, and I don't think people would say that I am stupid.

Delusional...eh, the jury's still out. :D

I've never had a religion. My parents weren't religious, so they never fed us the stories, and when they taught us about the different religions in school it all struck me as ridiculous (I mean, magical sky wizards nailed to pieces of wood or who extract daughters from their skulls and shit, come on), so I never "searched" for one, either. There is simply no need for religion.

I never found religion, because I never looked for one. I was kinda sorta assigned one as a child, grew up and now I don't believe a word of it.

Oh, and I don't think people would say that I am stupid.

Delusional...eh, the jury's still out. :D

Sorry, maybe it's just me that's the stupid one. I really can't comprehend how people can believe in and worship gods.

:confused:

Sorry, maybe it's just me that's the stupid one. I really can't comprehend how people can believe in and worship gods.

:confused:

Why not? People believe and worship their leaders, so why not gods or God as well?

While I don't know of any gods that are represented as a very small people with wings, it is my belief that gods are simply imaginary creatures with magical powers.

im pretty sure that there are no fairies in the old testament, the new testament, or the koran. there probably arent even any fairies in the vedas or the whatchamacallits of buddhism.

is there a religion that worships tiny gods? what would make you think that there is any representative of such an obscure religion on NSgeneral?

Sorry, maybe it's just me that's the stupid one. I really can't comprehend how people can believe in and worship gods.

:confused:

Nope, you are not expected to either. It will never make sence untill you actually find god apparently.

Oh hell.

My mother is Catholic, my father is Muslim, they decided to raise me in the latter and I've never found a reason to throw away my belief. It doesn't really keep me from doing anything I want to do, anyway. Actually, it sometimes does, but I guess I just ignore those parts, which makes me a huge hypocrite. Oh well.

Sorry, maybe it's just me that's the stupid one. I really can't comprehend how people can believe in and worship gods.

:confused:

For some people, it is a difficult thing. On the other hand, I suppose some theists would think it impossible for one to not believe in a supernatural force.

im pretty sure that there are no fairies in the old testament, the new testament, or the koran. there probably arent even any fairies in the vedas or the whatchamacallits of buddhism.

is there a religion that worships tiny gods? what would make you think that there is any representative of such an obscure religion on NSgeneral?

Nike was a small dudette.

Why not? People believe and worship their leaders, so why not gods or God as well?

These leaders you mention don't have magical powers.

Erm, erm...how can I put this without offending people...fuck it, I'll just say it how I see it.

It's my belief that religions are just a load of superstitious nonsense and those that believe in them were brainwashed as a child or are just delusional or stupid. All these tales about God can't possibly be true. Of course, I'm sure that a few of you believe differently. But one of us has to be wrong, am I right? ;)

Anyway, I'll be making a poll to find out when most of you religious types first started to believe in fairies. I suspect most of you were taught at a young age by your parents. Maybe I'm wrong though, maybe you weren't brainwashed by your family and other religious nutjobs. If it turns out that all of you made an informed decision to believe in God as an adult, then I just might convert...

Don't hold your breath though, that's not likely to happen. I didn't make any promises. *Runs away*I was raised to go to church... I hated it. for years I found it boring and tedious.

so naturally, I lost my faith.

so when did I find religion? when God decided that the only way to drive his message though my thick skull was to drive it home... hard!

so after I picked myself up from the floor... (after finding myself knocked onto my back by a force I didn't see, filled with peace and happiness.) I regained my faith.

so, inactuality, I didn't find my religion... it found me. :D

as for you finding your religion... if you don't want to find it, don't worry, you won't.

Sorry, maybe it's just me that's the stupid one. I really can't comprehend how people can believe in and worship gods.

:confused:

Some theists may say that it is impossible for them to believe that the universe just popped randomly into existance.

well my Grandmother is a Jehovah witness and my parents are I guess not very religious Christians

I can’t say I was ever brainwashed myself when I was young my grandmother and my brother both read me bible stories but that’s just because there kick ass bedtime stories I never really caught on however I was brainwashed when I was about 12 to be an atheist fortunately I worked my way towards apathetic agnostic because Atheism is really about just being an asshole and thinking your some sort of renegade man with science on your side

I’m sick of atheists trying to stick there religion down my throat actually especially the ones who like to make comments all the time

I’m sick of atheists trying to stick there religion down my throat actually especially the ones who like to make comments all the time

Seconded! To a degree

I was raised to go to church... I hated it. for years I found it boring and tedious.

so naturally, I lost my faith.

so when did I find religion? when God decided that the only way to drive his message though my thick skull was to drive it home... hard!

so after I picked myself up from the floor... (after finding myself knocked onto my back by a force I didn't see, filled with peace and happiness.) I regained my faith.

so, inactuality, I didn't find my religion... it found me. :D

as for you finding your religion... if you don't want to find it, don't worry, you won't.

God punched you in the face and now you love him? Lol, JuNii ker-azy.
Joking, don't get God after me.

In the US, roughly 90% of religious individuals belong to the same denomination as their parents. Not just the same faith (i.e. Christian, Jewish), but the same denomination (i.e. Methodist, Reform).

Whether or not this reflects "brainwashing" is an interesting question. Statistically speaking, children will reject their parents' political beliefs quite often. Children will virtually always show significant differences of opinion on social matters (i.e. gay marriage, racial issues) when compared with their parents, since there tends to be a progressive shift with each new generation. However, religious belief does not appear to work the same way. Even children who reject their parents' political ideology will still be very likely to retain the "religious orientation" they were reared to.

I find that very interesting. If children are really "brainwashed" into religious belief, why doesn't this appear to happen with other areas? (Or, at least, why does it happen to a much lesser degree?)

at a guess, i would say it's because the religion a person is brought up within plays a much larger social role for them. you wind up knowing people within your church or whatever and interacting with them in various ways from an early age.

im pretty sure that there are no fairies in the old testament, the new testament, or the koran. there probably arent even any fairies in the vedas or the whatchamacallits of buddhism.

is there a religion that worships tiny gods? what would make you think that there is any representative of such an obscure religion on NSgeneral?

*Sigh* Can't you read? Fairies are usually represented as a very small person with wings. The rest of the description fits gods quite well, as I see it.

Nike was a small dudette.

i did not know that. i wonder if she had a big following...

sir arthur conan doyle (author of the sherlock holmes stories) was a big believer in fairies. i think his religion was probably CofE but i cant be bothered to look it up. i dont think that fairies are part of the dogma of the CofE in any case.

God punched you in the face and now you love him? Lol, JuNii ker-azy.
Joking, don't get God after me.

not the face, in the chest... the heart, where I invited him in a long time ago.

so he did have that right to knock me on my ass... since I was being one at that time. :D

and considering how I felt when he decked me...

you would've loved it. :D

These leaders you mention don't have magical powers.

*shrug*
How do you know God has magical powers (assuming he exists)? Maybe he created the whole universe and performed the miracles through pure mechanical force. No way to prove he didn't, no way to prove he did.

so when did I find religion? when God decided that the only way to drive his message though my thick skull was to drive it home... hard!

so after I picked myself up from the floor... (after finding myself knocked onto my back by a force I didn't see, filled with peace and happiness.) I regained my faith.

and you don't find it odd at all that the religion that you found was essentially the same one that you grew up with and that culturally surrounds you?

*Sigh* Can't you read? Fairies are usually represented as a very small person with wings. The rest of the description fits gods quite well, as I see it.

are you suggesting that there is a race of HUGE fairies out there somewhere?

i did not know that. i wonder if she had a big following...



IIRC, she and Athena were homegirls.

*Sigh* Can't you read? Fairies are usually represented as a very small person with wings. The rest of the description fits gods quite well, as I see it.

She's just being specious in an attempt to troll you away from your point. Don't bite.

*shrug*
How do you know God has magical powers (assuming he exists)? Maybe he created the whole universe and performed the miracles through pure mechanical force. No way to prove he didn't, no way to prove he did.

God is MacGyver I fucking knew it!!!!

IIRC, she and Athena were homegirls.

She was a war goddess who personified victory, and she is often depicted standing alongside the other war gods: Athena, Zeus, and Ares.

and you don't find it odd at all that the religion that you found was essentially the same one that you grew up with and that culturally surrounds you?
actually, my viewpoints are different then the ones I was raised upon. call it private ephifanies, or God showing me the truth.

but right now, I no longer say I'm Baptist, nor do I say I'm Catholic, but I say I'm a Christian.

She was a war goddess who personified victory, and she is often depicted standing alongside the other war gods: Athena, Zeus, and Ares.

As I said, a ghetto posse, bent on kicking ass.

When did I find religion? Which time?

When I was young, I used to go to church, sing the songs and be bored. I went to Sunday School, and (as it was the local one) a CofE primary school. I just thought it was one of those things you did, like go to school, because you had no choice. In hindsight it was quite strange; nobody in my family is at all religious.

Anyway, eventually I stopped going to Church and Sunday School (rumour has it I was chucked out of the latter for asking awkward questions), and later went to Secondary school. I didn't think about it until I got to know one of my friends, the son of a Vicar, and found out that people actually believed that stuff. I'm still yet to understand why.

So no, I've never believed. It never crossed my mind, even when praying.

As I said, a ghetto posse, bent on kicking ass.

lol. The Greco-Roman Gods, rollin' 4 deep.

Just out of curiosity, what is it with atheists and the constant bashing of the religious/those who believe in an afterlife?

I remember finding religion as a teenager. My parents were divorced and I lived alone my dad, who is a Unitarian. So he has a lot of religious texts in our house: The Bible, The Quaran, The Rig Vedas, et cetera. I stumbled upon a copy of the Gospels. Now, at the time I was honestly one of those who had never been exposed to religion at all in my life, and I only had the vaguest understanding of Christianity. But I read Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John, and I remember just being amazed and thinking, "If only Christians would read what Jesus said, and tried to live like he did. There would be no hunger, you'd feed anyone who hungered; no fighting, you'd turn the other cheek; everyone would be tolerant, loving, forgiving, charitable." I thought about it later, and though I couldn't believe in immaculate conception and being raised from the dead. The things Jesus said. If he were here today and said those things, I'd follow him to the end of the earth. (And hey, according to Revelations, that's what's going to happen!)

But it's my doubts that make me a Unitarian. There are a lot of aspects of other religions that I like also, I think they all have something to offer

lol. The Greco-Roman Gods, rollin' 4 deep.



Poseidon be ridin spinnaz, yo.

She's just being specious in an attempt to troll you away from your point. Don't bite.

i beg your pardon. vacuumhead asked in his OP when we started believing in fairies. i am simply pursuing his question.

Raised religiously as a child until right before middle school. One time around then I had accidentally dropped a prayer book or something, and then one of my asshat Sunday school teachers started yelling in my face (flinging spit everywhere, his temple veins pulsing). So my parents decided to pull me out (something I thank them for, as there was probably at least one child molester there. Well probably not, but I just feel like slandering those religious freaks at that place).

In any case, from then on I held my belief in God (with some ventures into agnosticism) but had a distrust in most religious figures. There are/were a few whom I held respect for but they were exceptions.

Where did I find religion? Right under the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow

Where did I find religion? Right under the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow

So that's what the leprechaun was talking about. Meh, I was happy with the gold and high quality pot.

Just out of curiosity, what is it with atheists and the constant bashing of the religious/those who believe in an afterlife?

my pet theory is the fact that its something they can insult yet still have the moral high ground if someone turns round and smacks them

edit: of course a rough generalisation

my pet theory is the fact that its something they can insult yet still have the moral high ground if someone turns round and smacks them

Oh. Yeah, that makes sense... *sigh*

Erm, erm...how can I put this without offending people...fuck it, I'll just say it how I see it.

It's my belief that religions are just a load of superstitious nonsense and those that believe in them were brainwashed as a child or are just delusional or stupid. All these tales about God can't possibly be true. Of course, I'm sure that a few of you believe differently. But one of us has to be wrong, am I right? ;)

Anyway, I'll be making a poll to find out when most of you religious types first started to believe in fairies. I suspect most of you were taught at a young age by your parents. Maybe I'm wrong though, maybe you weren't brainwashed by your family and other religious nutjobs. If it turns out that all of you made an informed decision to believe in God as an adult, then I just might convert...

Don't hold your breath though, that's not likely to happen. I didn't make any promises. *Runs away*

Heh. I thought you were a deeply religious person by the thread title.

Just to say something.

I found God when I was a baby. Then I discovered logic.

Needless to say, I'm an atheist.

Some theists may say that it is impossible for them to believe that the universe just popped randomly into existance.

It's more feasible than a supreme being. At least it is to me.

Last night I prostrated myself before a fridge full of beer, if that counts for anything.

In my mind, when you say this


Then I discovered logic.

this


Needless to say, I'm an atheist.

doesn't necessarily follow. I don't consider myself an illogically-thinking person, anyway. I sort of get what you're saying, though.

Last night I prostrated myself before a fridge full of beer, if that counts for anything.

That's tantamount to a religious experience right there

Last night I prostrated myself before a fridge full of beer, if that counts for anything.

Pfft. Prostration went out with pantaloons and anal pears.

are you suggesting that there is a race of HUGE fairies out there somewhere?
No, haven't you realised yet that I'm not superstitious. Of course I don't believe in faries of any size. And seeing as you don't seem to understand what usually means, I'll again point out the part of the meaning of fairy that I find to be quite accurate in summing up God: an imaginary creature with magical powers.

Just out of curiosity, what is it with atheists and the constant bashing of the religious/those who believe in an afterlife?
People may find it offensive but I am simply saying what I believe in. I'm sorry but I think religion is just a load of bullshit. Would you prefer if I was to sit quietly in a corner and keep what I think to myself?

Is jolt being a bitch? Everything has been so slow yet you lot seem to be posting lots. Maybe the faries hate me. :(

No, haven't you realised yet that I'm not superstitious. Of course I don't believe faries of any size. And seeing as you don't seem to understand what usually means I'll again point out the part of the meaning of fairy that I find to be quite accurate in summing up God: an imaginary creature with magical powers.

People may find it offensive but I am simply saying what I believe in. I'm sorry but I think religion is just a load of bullshit. Would you prefer if I was to sit quietly in a corner and keep what I think to myself?

Is jolt being a bitch? Everything has been so slow yet you lot seem to be posting lots. Maybe the faries hate me. :(

If you want to ask questions about a certain religion then ask. That does not mean you have to then insult the religion, there is no need for that. I am not stopping you, just advising you.

People may find it offensive but I am simply saying what I believe in. I'm sorry but I think religion is just a load of bullshit. Would you prefer if I was to sit quietly in a corner and keep what I think to myself?


It's more when some atheists say "all you 'believers' are a bunch of superstitious idiots". Your religious belief or lack thereof doesn't bother me in the slightest, even though some people will try to save your soul.


Is jolt being a bitch? Everything has been so slow yet you lot seem to be posting lots. Maybe the faries hate me. :(

Jolt doesn't need divine intervention to be a bitch; that's just its nature.

You see, one night, i was like...14..yeah back in 2001..wow 5 yrs already. anywho, i couldn't sleep I had a "burning bush"/"damascus road
experience and I accepted Jesus as my saviour.

No, haven't you realised yet that I'm not superstitious. Of course I don't believe in faries of any size. And seeing as you don't seem to understand what usually means, I'll again point out the part of the meaning of fairy that I find to be quite accurate in summing up God: an imaginary creature with magical powers.
(

i know YOU dont believe in fairies. i was trying to point out to you as gently as possible that probably NO ONE on this board believes in fairies. it really was a silly question now wasnt it?

actually, my viewpoints are different then the ones I was raised upon. call it private ephifanies, or God showing me the truth.

but right now, I no longer say I'm Baptist, nor do I say I'm Catholic, but I say I'm a Christian.

but not shintoist or a follower of isis. as i said...

No, haven't you realised yet that I'm not superstitious. Of course I don't believe in faries of any size. And seeing as you don't seem to understand what usually means, I'll again point out the part of the meaning of fairy that I find to be quite accurate in summing up God: an imaginary creature with magical powers.


oh, i feel it necessary to point out that imaginary creatures CANT have magical powers. things that dont exist dont have power eh?

It's more when some atheists say "all you 'believers' are a bunch of superstitious idiots". Your religious belief or lack thereof doesn't bother me in the slightest, even though some people will try to save your soul.
That's how I see it. I really cannot understand how intellegent people can believe in this cra...stuff, unless they were brainwashed. And I still don't get why they don't just realise that what they were taught can't possibly be true. I've said before just call me the idiot, seeing as I don't understand. I doubt I ever will.
:confused:

You see, one night, i was like...14..yeah back in 2001..wow 5 yrs already. anywho, i couldn't sleep I had a "burning bush"/"damascus road
experience and I accepted Jesus as my saviour.

would you find it interesting that people in every culture ever have experienced such things, and they almost always take it as an affirmation of the religion of their culture (and not some other religion entirely)?

It's my belief that religions are just a load of superstitious nonsense and those that believe in them were brainwashed as a child or are just delusional or stupid.

I don't find myself to be stupid, brainwashed or delusional (but how would I know really?)

I was raised in the church grew up thinking it was a bunch of hooey, rebeled, decided I was an atheist, got really screwed up (not anything to do with the atheism, I screwed up independent of that) and landed myself in intensive drug rehab (court ordered) the crazy counselor there (as opposed to the sane ones) led me to Christ. After that I met my husband who grew up church of Christ and then decided it was all a bunch of crap (his words) and became a Satanist, after a few months of marriage I brought up the conversation of why exactly church and God and misc. was bunk and he decided it wasn't but that he was just around a bunch of assholes growing up who used it for less than Christ-like purposes. He went to seminary, became a minister, is out of work in the God business right now (well, for cash money anyway, still works, just gets less tangible benefit) but it's okay since he has a degree in computer science.

does that answer your question?

but not shintoist or a follower of isis. as i said...

maybe that's because the religion I'm following is the right one for me.

and I did try Buddism for a while, during my "lost" years... funny that didn't take. but then you can say some balderdash about brainwashing or what not. :rolleyes:

i beg your pardon. vacuumhead asked in his OP when we started believing in fairies. i am simply pursuing his question.

You're trolling a troll. Get over it.

I didn't find religion. I had it semi-forced on me from an early age until I lost it.

Ditto. I made a conscious decision to lose it.

That's how I see it. I really cannot understand how intellegent people can believe in this cra...stuff, unless they were brainwashed. And I still don't get why they don't just realise that what they were taught can't possibly be true. I've said before just call me the idiot, seeing as I don't understand. I doubt I ever will.
:confused:

On the contrary, I've never seen evidence that God exists, or that God doesn't exist (it's hard as hell to prove a negative and all.) I don't feel like religious belief is necessarily illogical, although I'd need to write out a long argument defending that position that I'm way too lazy to even think of right now. But I don't agree with your "can't possibly be true." "Probably isn't true, because we have no testable evidence"? Sure. But not admitting the possibility seems to me illogical.

That's how I see it. I really cannot understand how intellegent people can believe in this cra...stuff, unless they were brainwashed. And I still don't get why they don't just realise that what they were taught can't possibly be true. I've said before just call me the idiot, seeing as I don't understand. I doubt I ever will.
:confused:

Sigh...

We've had this argument over and over again. The existence (or lack thereof) of God cannot be objectively disproven or proven, based on natural evidence.

Ergo, faith. Something that theists have and atheists do not.

balderdash

What an awesome word!

You're trolling a troll. Get over it.

oh now baguetten, for me to be a troll is to suggest that vacuumhead was flaming all religious people in his comparison of god to fairies. if he wasnt seriously asking about belief in fairies what was he doing?

These leaders you mention don't have magical powers.

Except for Scientologists of course.

oh now baguetten, for me to be a troll is to suggest that vacuumhead was flaming all religious people in his comparison of god to fairies. if he wasnt seriously asking about belief in fairies what was he doing?

You seriously think I'm gonna bite your bait? Oh, Ashmoria, please. :rolleyes: Your trolling'll have to be a lot less amateurish for that to happen.

maybe that's because the religion I'm following is the right one for me.

as defined by what?

and I did try Buddism for a while, during my "lost" years... funny that didn't take. but then you can say some balderdash about brainwashing or what not. :rolleyes:

and you don't find it funny that people raised in other cultures would have similar stories but in reverse?

Honestly, I can understand faith.. Sometimes I wish I had it. But I don't get religion.

What i want to know is how many Faries would it take to kick an Angels ass? Or is it the other way around? And do they pull hair? That would be hot.

In my opinion, religion = delusion and arrogance. I could write an essay.

Of course, I will never try to take someone away from their religion. That is their (although perhaps not exactly their) choice in life, and, well, sorry to put it this way, but they can ruin it and allow themselves to let themselves and others down if they so choose.

I believe there should be no specific religion schools. I have two sisters in a catholic primary school, and so far the first one has shown all signs of brainwash. The second one hasn't started school yet, but she will be entering reception year in september.

You seriously think I'm gonna bite your bait? Oh, Ashmoria, please. :rolleyes: Your trolling'll have to be a lot less amateurish for that to happen.

i wasnt really looking for your response. you arent the one who flamed the believers of nsgeneral.

Sigh...

We've had this argument over and over again. The existence (or lack thereof) of God cannot be objectively disproven or proven, based on natural evidence.

Ergo, faith. Something that theists have and atheists do not.

Hmmm...well I've heard your bible has many contradictions and things that have been scientifically disproven. Isn't the bible supposed to be the word of God or something? I don't understand how someone can choose to believe in a part of it. There are a few lies in the book so how can any of it be accepted as truth? I really don't get those crazies that think it is all true. It's these organised religions I don't get, and all the tales its followers just accept as the truth. I think these religions are silly. Sorry. :(

What i want to know is how many Faries would it take to kick an Angels ass? Or is it the other way around? And do they pull hair? That would be hot.

hmmmm i wonder if any of the great medieval theologians addressed that question. fairies have more powers but angels are much bigger. its a tough question but id pay to see the fight on PPV.

i wasnt really looking for your response. you arent the one who flamed the believers of nsgeneral.

This time. :p

...but angels are much bigger

Not nessesarily, rumor has it that large numbers of Angels have been discovered dancing on the heads of pins.

This time. :p

LOL

exactly

and you can bet that when you do so in the future i wont be taking you to task for it. i may be amateurish but im not stupid.

Hmmm...well I've heard your bible has many contradictions and things that have been scientifically disproven. Isn't the bible supposed to be the word of God or something? I don't understand how someone can choose to believe in a part of it. There are a few lies in the book so how can any of it be accepted as truth? I really don't get those crazies that think it is all true. It's these organised religions I don't get, and all the tales its followers just accept as the truth. I think these religions are silly. Sorry. :(

You're taking the very most literal view of the Bible and using that to dismiss all religious belief all over the world? Come on. Some parts of that stuff have to be understood in a historical context, and yes, some parts seem like nonsense. The essence of the stuff is contained in The Prophets of OT (the parts about social justice) and the Gospels (social justice, humility, generosity, kindness.) That's the whole point, not "thou shalt not cook a calf in its mother's milk".

There's a lot of good to be taken from the Bible, and you don't even have to be religious to take from it.

Not nessesarily, rumor has it that large numbers of Angels have been discovered dancing on the heads of pins.

hmmmm maybe they have really small feet?

when angels visit people in the bible, do they come in solid form or only as spirits?

ohhhh and as i remember from the movie DOGMA, one of my primary sources of religious knowledge, angels dont have asses so they cant get their asses kicked!

im not stupid.

On that we can agree. :)

Hmmm...well I've heard your bible has many contradictions and things that have been scientifically disproven. Isn't the bible supposed to be the word of God or something? I don't understand how someone can choose to believe in a part of it. There are a few lies in the book so how can any of it be accepted as truth? I really don't get those crazies that think it is all true. It's these organised religions I don't get, and all the tales its followers just accept as the truth. I think these religions are silly. Sorry. :(

The Bible was written by man. Man is fallible.

Plus, the Bible is not one book. It's a collection. A collection of works. A collection of works with many different proposes. The old testament is a history. Some more literal than others. The gospels, a chronicle of Jesus, and his doings and sayings. The letters, a show of support, and the answering of questions. And then theres Revelations. Crazy book. Kind of cool, too.

Listen, I don't give a shit what you believe, or if you believe. I'm not one of those Christians that think everyone should believe. I do, however take offense to you calling me delusional and stupid for what I believe. You, sir, have no right.

as defined by what?faith and belief. hence, the "For Me" part.

and you don't find it funny that people raised in other cultures would have similar stories but in reverse?which is why I neither 1) put down anyone's belief. 2) denouce their claims 3) challange their beliefs unless it directly conflicts with my own.

My parents took me to church growing up, well, mostly my dad, my mom's never been a morning person. I was raised religious and expected to believe and I think I did for a while, even though the explanations they gave me were never satisfactory... eventually I determined that christianity wasn't for me and stopped going.

I was born into and reared as a conservative Presbyterian, but I really didn't have any idea what it truly meant to be a Christian much less a Presbyterian. If I can give you a weak illustration: it was as if I was living in the US, but I wasn't a citizen.

It wasn't until 6th grade that I gave my life to Christ, but I ralley didn't take it seriuosly until about two summers ago when I actually started looking into and investigating stuff like the Trinity, the Fall, salvation, etc that I could really call myself a Christian and a Presbyterian. It was a decision that I made (though the Holy Spirit changed my heart so that I could do it - I am Presbyterian!) and it was not forced upon me. I haven't been brainwashed in the conventional sense. My brain was washed from the dirty lies of the world, but it wasn't washed of reason or intelligence (at least I hope not! :) ).

hmmmm maybe they have really small feet?

when angels visit people in the bible, do they come in solid form or only as spirits?

ohhhh and as i remember from the movie DOGMA, one of my primary sources of religious knowledge, angels dont have asses so they cant get their asses kicked!

Yea but the Faries have the stick wih the sharp pointy star on the end that grants wishes. They could wish that the Angels would get asses then proced to kick them.

I have no idea what religion to believe in, half catholic, half muslim, sort of unitarian, part quaker(maybe) with a dash of agnosticism. -_-

All religions involving gods are wrong. Wanna know why?

All religions can trace their roots back to someone / some people who either BELIEVED they had some kind of divine inspiration, or wanted people to BELIEVE they had. BELIEF.

BELIEF is a CONCEPT, which I entirely reject.

BELIEF is the result of PERSUASION.

One may wish to place guidelines upon their life in order to achieve this or that, but to say a GOD or another kind of spiritual (fictional) being has placed these guidelines upon you is sheer ARROGANCE and self-DELUSION.

To implicate this ARROGANCE and DELUSION upon those too young, naïve or perhaps stupid to understand this, whom are the only people who have not the knowledge or the mental capacity to reject it, is CORRUPTION and on par with PAEDOPHILIA - another CORRUPTION and another way to DEBASE their lives.

You wanna have a nice 3 or 4 hour talk with God try LSD. Only problem is you wont remember a word of it when you sober up.

All religions involving gods are wrong. Wanna know why?

All religions can trace their roots back to someone / some people who either BELIEVED they had some kind of divine inspiration, or wanted people to BELIEVE they had. BELIEF.

BELIEF is a CONCEPT, which I entirely reject.

BELIEF is the result of PERSUASION.

One may wish to place guidelines upon their life in order to achieve this or that, but to say a GOD or another kind of spiritual (fictional) being has placed these guidelines upon you is sheer ARROGANCE and self-DELUSION.

To implicate this ARROGANCE and DELUSION upon those too young, naïve or perhaps stupid to understand this, whom are the only people who have not the knowledge or the mental capacity to reject it, is CORRUPTION and on par with PAEDOPHILIA - another CORRUPTION and another way to DEBASE their lives.

uh, no.

You know, I really don't know where in me that came from. That was cool! Give me something else to rant about! Hahaha.

uh, no.

Nice counter argument there. I'm sure you took the time to read it.

All religions involving gods are wrong. Wanna know why?

All religions can trace their roots back to someone / some people who either BELIEVED they had some kind of divine inspiration, or wanted people to BELIEVE they had. BELIEF.

BELIEF is a CONCEPT, which I entirely reject.

BELIEF is the result of PERSUASION.

One may wish to place guidelines upon their life in order to achieve this or that, but to say a GOD or another kind of spiritual (fictional) being has placed these guidelines upon you is sheer ARROGANCE and self-DELUSION.

To implicate this ARROGANCE and DELUSION upon those too young, naïve or perhaps stupid to understand this, whom are the only people who have not the knowledge or the mental capacity to reject it, is CORRUPTION and on par with PAEDOPHILIA - another CORRUPTION and another way to DEBASE their lives.

That is the most idiotic reasoning i have ever heard. If you are going to find a way to bash religion, at least find intelligent reasons.

Listen, I don't give a shit what you believe, or if you believe. I'm not one of those Christians that think everyone should believe. I do, however take offense to you calling me delusional and stupid for what I believe.
Those people that have a 'weird' experience (like a shiver) then blow it all out of proportion and think it was a divine message are delusional. Those people that just accept their faith without thinking how impossible it is must be lacking in judgement. People who think God talks directly to them are just plain crazy. These (and brainwashing) are the only ways I can think of to rationalise this. Help me out if you know of any other reasons people choose to believe in a blatant lie.

All religions involving gods are wrong. Wanna know why?

All religions can trace their roots back to someone / some people who either BELIEVED they had some kind of divine inspiration, or wanted people to BELIEVE they had. BELIEF.

BELIEF is a CONCEPT, which I entirely reject.

BELIEF is the result of PERSUASION.

One may wish to place guidelines upon their life in order to achieve this or that, but to say a GOD or another kind of spiritual (fictional) being has placed these guidelines upon you is sheer ARROGANCE and self-DELUSION.

To implicate this ARROGANCE and DELUSION upon those too young, naïve or perhaps stupid to understand this, whom are the only people who have not the knowledge or the mental capacity to reject it, is CORRUPTION and on par with PAEDOPHILIA - another CORRUPTION and another way to DEBASE their lives.



YES, because teaching children religion is akin to MOLESTING THEM

You know, I really don't know where in me that came from. That was cool! Give me something else to rant about! Hahaha.

Too many Pinecones in your oatmeal.

That is the most idiotic reasoning i have ever heard. If you are going to find a way to bash religion, at least find intelligent reasons.

Go ahead yourself then.

Was I bashing religion? No, I was arguing my case as to why I know religion involving theism is wrong.

Did you even begin to THINK while you were reading that? No, you just read it, complacent and oblivious.

Nice counter argument there. I'm sure you took the time to read it.

well then your right, I did read it hence the underlining of your little slur

on par with paedophilia can you please explain how religion=paedophilia?

Yea but the Faries have the stick wih the sharp pointy star on the end that grants wishes. They could wish that the Angels would get asses then proced to kick them.
oooooo excellent point. i wish i had thought of it.

Those people that have a 'weird' experience (like a shiver) then blow it all out of proportion and think it was a divine message are delusional. Those people that just accept their faith without thinking how impossible it is must be lacking in judgement. People who think God talks directly to them are just plain crazy. These (and brainwashing) are the only ways I can think of to rationalise this. Help me out if you know of any other reasons people choose to believe in a blatant lie.

I see you completely ignored everything in the previous post.

You cannot decide what is a lie and what is not. You do not know. Unless you have, somehow, been back from the dead. Until you can prove that God does not exist, you cannot call a believer (me) a liar.

oooooo excellent point. i wish i had thought of it.

BUT we also have to consider, did God install anti farie defences on the Angel models? We couldnt have Gods messengers turning into sheep at a Faries beckoning. maybe they at least get a saving throw?

Nice counter argument there. I'm sure you took the time to read it.

ROFL

Don't you hate it when people refuse to drop to your level?
Tell you what. We all read your post. We were also all similarly mind-boggled by your use of angst and Caps-lock as a poor substitute for reasoning.

[Robot Voice]ALL RELIGION IS BAD IHATERELIGION YOUR A CHILD MOLESTER IF YOU BELIEVE IN A GOD RARAFLAHFLAH GURGLEDURGLE READ THIS POST CAPSCAPSCAPS[/Robot Voice]

You did make me laugh, if that was your goal:D

I see you completely ignored everything in the previous post.

You cannot decide what is a lie and what is not. You do not know. Unless you have, somehow, been back from the dead. Until you can prove that God does not exist, you cannot call a believer (me) a liar.

No, you don't seem like a liar. Just stupid enough to believe in a god and souls and an afterlife. Has your mother told you that the easter bunny isn't real yet?

That's how I see it. I find it ridiculous that people believe in this crap. I find it appalling that it is taught as truth.

Those people that have a 'weird' experience (like a shiver) then blow it all out of proportion and think it was a divine message are delusional. Those people that just accept their faith without thinking how impossible it is must be lacking in judgement. People who think God talks directly to them are just plain crazy. These (and brainwashing) are the only ways I can think of to rationalise this. Help me out if you know of any other reasons people choose to believe in a blatant lie.

This just shows what you placed your faith in. How do you know that God does not talk to them? The answer is you don't. You can highly, highly, highly suspect that He doesn't, but you can't know. There are only two ways to truly know. You can either know that there is no God (which is unprovable) or you can know
God (in the sense that you know about Him, which is also unproveable). Either one takes faith. I know you probably hate that. But that's the answer. Right now you have faith in the idea that there is no God. You have taken evidence (the same evidence I use to support the existence of a God) and have decided that He cannot exist. Because you cannot prove it however, you require faith to believe it.

And I forget where I was going with that.

No, you don't seem like a liar. Just stupid enough to believe in a god and souls and an afterlife. Has your mother told you that the easter bunny isn't real yet?

That's how I see it. I find it ridiculous that people believe in this crap. I find it appalling that it is taught as truth.

LOL
Enjoy your beliefs. I, however, simply can't understand why Christians allow opinions like this to offend them. Your intolerance merely makes me treasure my maturity. If you can't laugh at a post like this, you should examine your beliefs to see why it bothers you so much.

No, you don't seem like a liar. Just stupid enough to believe in a god and souls and an afterlife. Has your mother told you that the easter bunny isn't real yet?

That's how I see it. I find it ridiculous that people believe in this crap. I find it appalling that it is taught as truth.

Again, you do not know. Is it possible that you might be wrong? Is it possible that Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Jainism, or any other innumerable religions may be correct.

You, along with everyone else on earth, lack the knowledge to make the judgment.

And I forget where I was going with that.

atheism is a faith, even though it is the faith that there is nothing to have faith in...you still have faith in that faith............*collapses from brain hemerraging*

BUT we also have to consider, did God install anti farie defences on the Angel models? We couldnt have Gods messengers turning into sheep at a Faries beckoning. maybe they at least get a saving throw?

the angels of "dogma" notwithstanding, im thinking that angels are on earth only to do some bidding of god. i doubt they are authorized to engage in any fighting even by self defense. (did the angels who visited lot do anything to protect themselves?)

if the fairies got right to it, they could kick the angels (newly installed) asses before they could get god to tell them to fight back.

No, you don't seem like a liar. Just stupid enough to believe in a god and souls and an afterlife. Has your mother told you that the easter bunny isn't real yet?

That's how I see it. I find it ridiculous that people believe in this crap. I find it appalling that it is taught as truth.

So all those nobel prize winners, respected scientists, poloticians, revolutionists etc.. that are religious are now idiots because you say so?

well then your right, I did read it hence the underlining of your little slur

can you please explain how religion=paedophilia?

YES, because teaching children religion is akin to MOLESTING THEM

seeing as you have the intelligence to attempt to patronise me by copying me:

I REPEAT: "another corruption, and a way to debase their lives".

Teaching children religion is telling them something is true, which they believe.

If a paedophile were to tell them "don't worry, this is what everyone does to each other. It's normal." the child will believe. Corruption.

Eventually, of course, they may encounter something that contradicts these beliefs. If this is at a younger age, they will become confused and disorientated. This could also happen to you at an older age.

These children will be brought up with fear that if they do something wrong, they will be punished by their god, or at least someone who apparently represents their god, as a result of their actions. Debasing their lives.

These children, (if you understand what I am saying here), are brought up deluded, and indirectly arrogant due to the arrogance of their religion's beliefs.

Belief is the result of persuasion.

Many, many religions now advertise their beliefs and the benefits of their beliefs, as Asda or Tesco (supermarkets) would do. Children are persuaded by the words of these people. Adults are PERSUADED by the words of these people. They are persuaded through their own selfish "needs": Enlightenment this; Peace that; the apparent benefits of the religion drilled into their heads as much as the next advertisment or leaflet.

Humans cannot create things from thin air: that is why magic does not exist, that is why GODS do not exist. The words of some prophet do not create truth.

There is no belief: There is but truth and untruth, existance and nonexistance. Your existance or your ability to persuade and manipulate others do not change this.

No, you don't seem like a liar. Just stupid enough to believe in a god and souls and an afterlife. Has your mother told you that the easter bunny isn't real yet?

That's how I see it. I find it ridiculous that people believe in this crap. I find it appalling that it is taught as truth.

My only response is that you should either take a philosophy class that addresses these problems or read some theist philosophers who try to use logic in understanding belief. Things aren't quite as black and white as you seem to think.

And don't you agree, anyway, that there are some parts of scripture that have good messages, such as supporting social justice, humility and charity? Not all of it is tribal "he begat he who begat he" bullshit.

faith and belief. hence, the "For Me" part.

which is why I neither 1) put down anyone's belief. 2) denouce their claims 3) challange their beliefs unless it directly conflicts with my own.

do you or do you not think that your religious experience is evidence that your religion is the correct one, that others are wrong?

atheism is a faith, even though it is the faith that there is nothing to have faith in...you still have faith in that faith............*collapses from brain hemerraging*

It is a faith. It does not have a deity in which to have faith. Rather it has an idea which requires faith. That idea is atheism's "god": it drives your secondary beliefs and guides your actions or at least the reasoning behind your actions.

BELIEF is a CONCEPT, which I entirely reject.

you may hold the belief that you reject the concept of belief, but that's nonsensical.

ROFL

Don't you hate it when people refuse to drop to your level?
Tell you what. We all read your post. We were also all similarly mind-boggled by your use of angst and Caps-lock as a poor substitute for reasoning.

[Robot Voice]ALL RELIGION IS BAD IHATERELIGION YOUR A CHILD MOLESTER IF YOU BELIEVE IN A GOD RARAFLAHFLAH GURGLEDURGLE READ THIS POST CAPSCAPSCAPS[/Robot Voice]

You did make me laugh, if that was your goal:D

A lovely interpretation. Yes, of course, religious figureheads are child molesters, aren't they?

No. I was comparing their concepts. There are differences, there are similarities.

Yes, I did dramatise. Do you have a problem with that? I don't care, that's for sure.

I admit, perhaps I may have put it from my perspective, which is hard to understand, and hard to follow, as much as the next person's perspective. As far as I was concerned, the reasons were all perfectly clear and interlinked. Oh well.

*Awaits flaming for the last rant he had*

if the fairies got right to it, they could kick the angels (newly installed) asses before they could get god to tell them to fight back.

Ahhh but this isnt the heaven of old. Back then permission slips had to be filled out in triplicate with that carbon paper that would get on your fingers and make them turn blue. And you would be LUCKY if God got back to you in 4-6 weeks. Now with computers and walkie talkies and laserguided information transfer, the Angels could get the go ahead from above to take out the faries near instantaniously. Im also hearing rumors that God is considering granting preemptive defensive strike options to his Angels as well. God learned that from G Bush.

you may hold the belief that you reject the concept of belief, but that's nonsensical.

I KNOW I reject the concept of belief. I don't believe in things; I either know [of] them or I don't.

You could say that's akin to saying "I've never seen, nor heard of the existance of some people, therefore they don't exist." Actually, it's not. I have the knowledge that there are people I have not met, things I have not done nor seen.

seeing as you have the intelligence to attempt to patronise me by copying me:

I REPEAT: "another corruption, and a way to debase their lives".

Teaching children religion is telling them something is true, which they believe.

If a paedophile were to tell them "don't worry, this is what everyone does to each other. It's normal." the child will believe. Corruption.

Eventually, of course, they may encounter something that contradicts these beliefs. If this is at a younger age, they will become confused and disorientated. This could also happen to you at an older age.

These children will be brought up with fear that if they do something wrong, they will be punished by their god, or at least someone who apparently represents their god, as a result of their actions. Debasing their lives.

These children, (if you understand what I am saying here), are brought up deluded, and indirectly arrogant due to the arrogance of their religion's beliefs.

Belief is the result of persuasion.

Many, many religions now advertise their beliefs and the benefits of their beliefs, as Asda or Tesco (supermarkets) would do. Children are persuaded by the words of these people. Adults are PERSUADED by the words of these people. They are persuaded through their own selfish "needs": Enlightenment this; Peace that; the apparent benefits of the religion drilled into their heads as much as the next advertisment or leaflet.

Humans cannot create things from thin air: that is why magic does not exist, that is why GODS do not exist. The words of some prophet do not create truth.

There is no belief: There is but truth and untruth, existance and nonexistance. Your existance or your ability to persuade and manipulate others do not change this.

First of all, yes I was mocking you with that "MOLESTING" thing because quite frankly your suggestion was ridiculous. How you can compare a parent or preacher, who while possibly wrong in belief, has good intentions for the child, to a fucking rapist who wants to rather RAPE the child and has no good intention whatsoever is beyond me.

Now I'm going to pull out a passage, and tell me if you agree with the sentiment.


Only if you thoroughly reform your ways and your deeds; if each of you deals justly with his neighbor;
if you no longer oppress the resident alien, the orphan, and the widow; if you no longer shed innocent blood in this place, will I remain with you in this place, or follow strange gods to your own harm, in the land which I gave your fathers long ago and forever.


Aside from the "strange gods" part, how about it?

So all those nobel prize winners, respected scientists, poloticians, revolutionists etc.. that are religious are now idiots because you say so?

They were persuaded into belief, either self persuaded or by others.

It's not idiocy, it's delusion.

This just shows what you placed your faith in. How do you know that God does not talk to them? The answer is you don't. You can highly, highly, highly suspect that He doesn't, but you can't know. There are only two ways to truly know. You can either know that there is no God (which is unprovable) or you can know
God (in the sense that you know about Him, which is also unproveable). Either one takes faith. I know you probably hate that. But that's the answer. Right now you have faith in the idea that there is no God. You have taked evidence (the same evidence I use to support the existence of a God) and have decided that He cannot exist. Because you cannot prove it however, you require faith to believe it.

And I forget where I was going with that.
People keep insisting that it can't be proved that god doesn't exsist. Well what about all these things that he has apparently done which have been disproven? No all-powerful being created the universe or humankind (we evolved, or haven't you heard about that?). If you want to use the word faith to describe my disbelieve then do so, I'd say I also have faith in the conservation of energy (or haven't you learned of that too?). It doesn't matter though, you wouldn't believe it. This law gets broken all the time by God. He keeps creating things from nothing. :rolleyes:

Aside from the "strange gods" part, how about it?

Actuall it says "follow strange gods to your own harm." So whole I disagree with relativism in theology, religion, and morality, the sin there might be the self harm bit (though of course the idolatry is the "big one" from an Evangelical point of view.).

I KNOW I reject the concept of belief. I don't believe in things; I either know [of] them or I don't.

You could say that's akin to saying "I've never seen, nor heard of the existance of some people, therefore they don't exist." Actually, it's not. I have the knowledge that there are people I have not met, things I have not done nor seen.

knowledge = justified true belief

if you don't believe x, then you cannot know x

Teaching children religion is telling them something is true, which they believe.

If a paedophile were to tell them "don't worry, this is what everyone does to each other. It's normal." the child will believe. Corruption.

That is manipulating a child into engaging in illegal sexual activity, the activity is the paedophilia not the lying part.


Eventually, of course, they may encounter something that contradicts these beliefs. If this is at a younger age, they will become confused and disorientated. This could also happen to you at an older age.


So?


These children will be brought up with fear that if they do something wrong, they will be punished by their god, or at least someone who apparently represents their god, as a result of their actions.


So?


These children, (if you understand what I am saying here), are brought up deluded, and indirectly arrogant due to the arrogance of their religion's beliefs.


In you're opinion. If i told my child how rain is formed in a cloud, and other theories contradicted that, does that make me an evil peadophile like monster? No it just means the child has been taught something that some people disagree with, no big deal. It is not as black and white as, if you believe in god you are dillusional. Anyway religion has nothing to do with how it is taught to people.


Belief is the result of persuasion.


This will be a laugh


Many, many religions now advertise their beliefs and the benefits of their beliefs, as Asda or Tesco (supermarkets) would do. Children are persuaded by the words of these people. Adults are PERSUADED by the words of these people. They are persuaded through their own selfish "needs": Enlightenment this; Peace that; the apparent benefits of the religion drilled into their heads as much as the next advertisment or leaflet.


Oh noes, some guy is telling me about religion :eek: Now they are evil opressive bastards trying to force religion down my throat and i cant help but accept :rolleyes:


Humans cannot create things from thin air: that is why magic does not exist, that is why GODS do not exist. The words of some prophet do not create truth.


Already you show your ignorance, God is not human.


There is no belief: There is but truth and untruth, existance and nonexistance. Your existance or your ability to persuade and manipulate others do not change this.

Nope, just because some guy pursuades some other guy to become a christian does not affect weather its true or not.

The only person I genuinely follow is myself - I may be assisted on the way, but it's my life.

Not once, of course, have I argued that people shouldn't be religious, I only argued my perspective. And NOT my beliefs.

I did dramatise, and I'm sorry I compared those with good intentions to those with bad. As I said: there are similarities, there are differences.

Look, you cannot "find religion". I don't believe in religion, I believe in God. There is a difference. You can have a religon about anything. And I asurre you, God is REAL.

The only person I genuinely follow is myself .

I tried to follow myself...but i kept waiting for me to move.

Until you can prove that God does not exist, you cannot call a believer (me) a liar.

One could just as easily cite an equal burden of proof belonging to the believer who claims that God does exist. However, in either case, such a burden of proof is ultimately meaningless, as to prove the existance or non-existance of God requires a human being to make sense of the supernatural when his or her senses only allow collection of information about the natural world to be achieved. That is, proving the existance/non-existance of God requires a human being to engage in feats which cannot possibly be accomplished (returning from the dead, as already pointed out, for instance).

Thus, to claim that someone must "prove that God does not exist" is to ask of someone what they cannot possibly do, and therefore the claim amounts to nothing more than a convienient mechanism for sidestepping and avoiding any possible criticism or doubt regarding one's own beliefs. This is also essentially the greatest feature, and greatest flaw, of any system of belief based upon the supernatural: I can believe and assert whatever I want without challenge.

Now, it is not necessarily true that such a mechanism must be used for the purposes of deception. However, the potential is great and must be recognized. The potential for deception lies in the recognition by some that they cannot prove, based on evidence gained in the natural world, that the claims of a religious authority figure are wrong, without recognition of the fact that such proof is impossible to render in the first place. Thus follows the basic logical fallacy that if the authority figure cannot be proven wrong, he must be right.

One must admit that deception and exploitation are possible, especially in a situation where people are more prone to think with their emotions rather than their reason.

In consideration of all of the above, my question is this: If God exists, and God wants to be recognized as, and treated like, a god, why does it hide behind the veil of the supernatural, where human beings, stranded in the realm of the natural world cannot possibly experience it, save for the unprovable claims of religious authorities who "speak" on its behalf? I see at least two possible answers: 1) God wants to play mindgames, test our faith, etc., or 2) God is an artificial concept invented by human beings. Unfortunately, the class of answers falling under (1) leave us with the same problem as before; it cannot be proven or disproven (edit: not to mention the fact that they assume the existance of God in order to explain away the lack of natural experience as an objection to the existance of God in the first place, thus constituting a case of very circular reasoning). Thus we are left with the class of answers that fall under (2), as these are the only class of answers that can possibly be proven or disproven according to information collected within human ability.

Assuming for the moment that (2) is the correct answer, I am led to another question: why was said artificial concept so invented?

(Hint: the historical relationship between religious institutions and political institutions/power should be carefully examined...)

People keep insisting that it can't be proved that god doesn't exsist. Well what about all these things that he has apparently done which have been disproven? No all-powerful being created the universe or humankind (we evolved, or haven't you heard about that?). If you want to use the word faith to describe my disbelieve then do so, I'd say I also have faith in the conservation of energy (or haven't you learned of that too?). It doesn't matter though, you wouldn't believe it. This law gets broken all the time by God. He keeps creating things from nothing. :rolleyes:

How do you know that God did not create the universe (and humanity) through natural processes. That's what most liberal Christians believe now.

A god of the universe would be all powerful. Surely the laws of physics would not apply to him/her.

seeing as you have the intelligence to attempt to patronise me by copying me:

I REPEAT: "another corruption, and a way to debase their lives".

Teaching children religion is telling them something is true, which they believe.

If a paedophile were to tell them "don't worry, this is what everyone does to each other. It's normal." the child will believe. Corruption.

Eventually, of course, they may encounter something that contradicts these beliefs. If this is at a younger age, they will become confused and disorientated. This could also happen to you at an older age.

These children will be brought up with fear that if they do something wrong, they will be punished by their god, or at least someone who apparently represents their god, as a result of their actions. Debasing their lives.

These children, (if you understand what I am saying here), are brought up deluded, and indirectly arrogant due to the arrogance of their religion's beliefs.

Belief is the result of persuasion.

Many, many religions now advertise their beliefs and the benefits of their beliefs, as Asda or Tesco (supermarkets) would do. Children are persuaded by the words of these people. Adults are PERSUADED by the words of these people. They are persuaded through their own selfish "needs": Enlightenment this; Peace that; the apparent benefits of the religion drilled into their heads as much as the next advertisment or leaflet.

Humans cannot create things from thin air: that is why magic does not exist, that is why GODS do not exist. The words of some prophet do not create truth.

There is no belief: There is but truth and untruth, existance and nonexistance. Your existance or your ability to persuade and manipulate others do not change this.

Generalization, plain and simple not every child is brainwashed

Example: me, raised by athiest guardians, now believes in god
tell me, does that stem from persuasion?

does your faith in athiesm stem from persuasion?

People keep insisting that it can't be proved that god doesn't exsist. Well what about all these things that he has apparently done which have been disproven? No all-powerful being created the universe or humankind (we evolved, or haven't you heard about that?). If you want to use the word faith to describe my disbelieve then do so, I'd say I also have faith in the conservation of energy (or haven't you learned of that too?). It doesn't matter though, you wouldn't believe it. This law gets broken all the time by God. He keeps creating things from nothing. :rolleyes:

Evolution, no matter how much evidence there is in support of it, is still far from being proven. I'll give you that a lot of the carbon dating and fossils and whatever else points to evolution (at least from the way they'e described in today's textbooks, but during Freud's times everyone though he was right too) but I am still far from convinced.

And I must admit, that while I have heard the law of conservation of energy, I can't say that I remember it fully. If I am correct it is that energy is neither created nor destroyed. I think you are really grasping for straws if my interpretation of this law is correct. The law is referring to the creation or destruction of energy within the universe or world or whatever you want to call it. Because God would be outside the universe (assuming He created it) He would not be affected by the laws he created. I don't think the law was ever to consider Creation at all. Rather it is referring to the relationship between things in the universe, not those things outside of it.

One could just as easily cite an equal burden of proof belonging to the believer who claims that God does exist. However, in either case, such a burden of proof is ultimately meaningless, as to prove the existance or non-existance of God requires a human being to make sense of the supernatural when his or her senses only allow collection of information about the natural world to be achieved. That is, proving the existance/non-existance of God requires a human being to engage in feats which cannot possibly be accomplished (returning from the dead, as already pointed out, for instance).

Thus, to claim that someone must "prove that God does not exist" is to ask of someone what they cannot possibly do, and therefore the claim amounts to nothing more than a convienient mechanism for sidestepping and avoiding any possible criticism or doubt regarding one's own beliefs. This is also essentially the greatest feature, and greatest flaw, of any system of belief based upon the supernatural: I can believe and assert whatever I want without challenge.


Nah it's kind of more like, proove the universe has existed for an eternity and has never had a beggining. If you cannot prove weather the universe has always been (atheism), or that the universe had a beggining (can only start from a force able to create matter). And no the big bang is not the beggining of our universe, just the universe as we know it. Matter existed before the big bang.

That is manipulating a child into engaging in illegal sexual activity, the activity is the paedophilia not the lying part.



So?



So?



In you're opinion. If i told my child how rain is formed in a cloud, and other theories contradicted that, does that make me an evil peadophile like monster? No it just means the child has been taught something that some people disagree with, no big deal. It is not as black and white as, if you believe in god you are dillusional. Anyway religion has nothing to do with how it is taught to people.



This will be a laugh



Oh noes, some guy is telling me about religion :eek: Now they are evil opressive bastards trying to force religion down my throat and i cant help but accept :rolleyes:



Already you show your ignorance, God is not human.



Nope, just because some guy pursuades some other guy to become a christian does not affect weather its true or not.

SO? Lives are debased because of religion, some may be improved, but the only way was up for those people.

Religion is ALL about the teachings. otherwise there would be nothing to follow, no guidelines to follow.

NO! I DO NOT SAY THAT THOSE WHO ADVERTISE RELIGION ARE EVIL OR OPRESSIVE. I WAS SHOWING ONE EXAMPLE OF WHY BELIEF IS A RESULT OF PERSUASION. I'm not some angsty Rage Against The Machine imbecile who simply says that "corporations are wrong" "save the trees" "they hurt people" blah, blah, et cetera. I'm not some pot-smoking, tree hugging sheep, merely an open, selfless thinker.

No, because God just IS because you say so, no? Religion wouldn't have even come up if it wasn't for some person believing in some superior force for some reason or another (Self-persuasion).

I didn't say that other things happen because someone does something unrelated to it! I was saying that these people believe that the words of others (be they now or from the past) have created a reality - ie a god!

God is a fictional figurehead - someone/thing/spirit/whatever else invented as a role model / implicator of rules that may / may not create such a role model.

I am inherently a spiritual person, but have thrown aside religion as my exploration of the world has broadened. I'm what you might call a "mystic". For a quick summary...

I have no disaffection for the ideas of Hinduism, and rather like the Gospel of Luke. I hold generally to abiogenesis as the origin of life, believe the universe is enclosed within a loop of cyclic time which denies the need for a creator God and hold to a rough combination of both physical reincarnation and spiritual continuation after death. I believe I have free will (due to the nature of what the "I" in that phrase is), I believe I am accountable to God for my actions, but that there is no punishment that reality itself does not enforce on me. I believe that Jesus of Nazareth was God, as was Buddha, as was Muhammad, as am I and as are you. I hold to the sanctity of nature, and hate no living thing, be they man or monster. I believe technology, too, is something not to be thrown aside but to be used for the benefit of all. I believe tribalism and group association is the cause of most of the world's ills, and believe that the nature of God is such that if everyone really held to the idea, we'd all be a lot better off. I believe that Religion only encourages this tribalism. I believe that, ultimately, it is individual thought and discussion that will bring an end to strife and conflict, and have faith in human nature to bring about a peaceful and prosperous world.

I also believe that nobody really cares that much what I believe. So I believe I shall go grab a drink.

Ahhh but this isnt the heaven of old. Back then permission slips had to be filled out in triplicate with that carbon paper that would get on your fingers and make them turn blue. And you would be LUCKY if God got back to you in 4-6 weeks. Now with computers and walkie talkies and laserguided information transfer, the Angels could get the go ahead from above to take out the faries near instantaniously. Im also hearing rumors that God is considering granting preemptive defensive strike options to his Angels as well. God learned that from G Bush.

damn

another thing to blame bush for

Evolution, no matter how much evidence there is in support of it, is still far from being proven. I'll give you that a lot of the carbon dating and fossils and whatever else points to evolution (at least from the way they'e described in today's textbooks, but during Freud's times everyone though he was right too) but I am still far from convinced.

And I must admit, that while I have heard the law of conservation of energy, I can't say that I remember it fully. If I am correct it is that energy is neither created nor destroyed. I think you are really grasping for straws if my interpretation of this law is correct. The law is referring to the creation or destruction of energy within the universe or world or whatever you want to call it. Because God would be outside the universe (assuming He created it) He would not be affected by the laws he created. I don't think the law was ever to consider Creation at all. Rather it is referring to the relationship between things in the universe, not those things outside of it.

I'm pretty much convinced by evolution, but for me that doesn't disprove God in any way. As someone else said above, the creation would have occurred through natural processes. There's no reason to believe that God created the Earth in seven days just because Genesis contains that story (it actually has two creation stories, all the more reason to believe that it's all figurative.)

Look, you cannot "find religion". I don't believe in religion, I believe in God. There is a difference. You can have a religon about anything. And I asurre you, God is REAL.

Religion is the acting out of or the action of one's theology. Theology is one's understanding of who God is and His relationship with those around Him. Therefore because everyone has some notion of who God is and his or her relationship to Him (even if it is that the person does not need to worry about God, because He does not exist) everyone has some way of acting on the theology, so everyone has a relgion.

Of coure, they may prefer God to be Allah, or Vishnu, or whoever.

God is a fictional figurehead - someone/thing/spirit/whatever else invented as a role model / implicator of rules that may / may not create such a role model.


When and how did you decide that God is a load of crap? I'm not arguing here, I'm just curious.

Of coure, they may prefer God to be Allah, or Vishnu, or whoever.


Allah = Abrahamic God. It's just the word for "the god" in Arabic - not a name. Sorry for being so pedantic, but it's an important point.

I am inherently a spiritual person, but have thrown aside religion as my exploration of the world has broadened. I'm what you might call a "mystic". For a quick summary...

I have no disaffection for the ideas of Hinduism, and rather like the Gospel of Luke. I hold generally to abiogenesis as the origin of life, believe the universe is enclosed within a loop of cyclic time which denies the need for a creator God and hold to a rough combination of both physical reincarnation and spiritual continuation after death. I believe I have free will (due to the nature of what the "I" in that phrase is), I believe I am accountable to God for my actions, but that there is no punishment that reality itself does not enforce on me. I believe that Jesus of Nazareth was God, as was Buddha, as was Muhammad, as am I and as are you. I hold to the sanctity of nature, and hate no living thing, be they man or monster. I believe technology, too, is something not to be thrown aside but to be used for the benefit of all. I believe tribalism and group association is the cause of most of the world's ills, and believe that the nature of God is such that if everyone really held to the idea, we'd all be a lot better off. I believe that Religion only encourages this tribalism. I believe that, ultimately, it is individual thought and discussion that will bring an end to strife and conflict, and have faith in human nature to bring about a peaceful and prosperous world.

I also believe that nobody really cares that much what I believe. So I believe I shall go grab a drink.


......that is interesting, sort of unitarian with a heavy hindu/buddhist influence (cyclical time theory)...

the muhammed/buddha=god thing is especially fascinating seeing as how muhammed never claimed to be god, only his delivery boy ;)

how did you come about this conclusion?

I'm pretty much convinced by evolution, but for me that doesn't disprove God in any way. As someone else said above, the creation would have occurred through natural processes. There's no reason to believe that God created the Earth in seven days just because Genesis contains that story (it actually has two creation stories, all the more reason to believe that it's all figurative.)

No, despite the theory introduced by the wonderful liberals in the Church, the "first story" is an overview of what happened each day while the "second story" recounts what happened particurally on the sixth day. I think that's how it is anyway: I don't have a Bible in front of me to confirm it. That has been the view of both the Jews and the Church for millenia and it was only recently that this idea surfaced (or resurfaced, but I doubt it). It's just another example of the religions bending to popular science by compromising their teachings rather than determing whether the science is correct. By correct I mean whether it is assuming more that proving.

One could just as easily cite an equal burden of proof belonging to the believer who claims that God does exist. However, in either case, such a burden of proof is ultimately meaningless, as to prove the existance or non-existance of God requires a human being to make sense of the supernatural when his or her senses only allow collection of information about the natural world to be achieved. That is, proving the existance/non-existance of God requires a human being to engage in feats which cannot possibly be accomplished (returning from the dead, as already pointed out, for instance).

Thus, to claim that someone must "prove that God does not exist" is to ask of someone what they cannot possibly do, and therefore the claim amounts to nothing more than a convienient mechanism for sidestepping and avoiding any possible criticism or doubt regarding one's own beliefs. This is also essentially the greatest feature, and greatest flaw, of any system of belief based upon the supernatural: I can believe and assert whatever I want without challenge.

Now, it is not necessarily true that such a mechanism must be used for the purposes of deception. However, the potential is great and must be recognized. The potential for deception lies in the recognition by some that they cannot prove, based on evidence gained in the natural world, that the claims of a religious authority figure are wrong, without recognition of the fact that such proof is impossible to render in the first place. Thus follows the basic logical fallacy that if the authority figure cannot be proven wrong, he must be right.

One must admit that deception and exploitation are possible, especially in a situation where people are more prone to think with their emotions rather than their reason.

In consideration of all of the above, my question is this: If God exists, and God wants to be recognized as, and treated like, a god, why does it hide behind the veil of the supernatural, where human beings, stranded in the realm of the natural world cannot possibly experience it, save for the unprovable claims of religious authorities who "speak" on its behalf? I see at least two possible answers: 1) God wants to play mindgames, test our faith, etc., or 2) God is an artificial concept invented by human beings. Unfortunately, the class of answers falling under (1) leave us with the same problem as before; it cannot be proven or disproven (edit: not to mention the fact that they assume the existance of God in order to explain away the lack of natural experience as an objection to the existance of God in the first place, thus constituting a case of very circular reasoning). Thus we are left with the class of answers that fall under (2), as these are the only class of answers that can possibly be proven or disproven according to information collected within human ability.

Assuming for the moment that (2) is the correct answer, I am led to another question: why was said artificial concept so invented?

(Hint: the historical relationship between religious institutions and political institutions/power should be carefully examined...)

Wow.

I wish I could word my arguments in such a way! Anyone who does not understand that is, well, not attempting to!

Perhaps politics did have an influence on religion. To some, however, that may appear as just another anarchic accusation of the government / corporations, etc. [Hint: not to me :)]

Religion is the acting out of or the action of one's theology. Theology is one's understanding of who God is and His relationship with those around Him. Therefore because everyone has some notion of who God is and his or her relationship to Him (even if it is that the person does not need to worry about God, because He does not exist) everyone has some way of acting on the theology, so everyone has a relgion.
I have a notion of something, but am unsure whether or not it is necessarily God. Does that count?

I found religion down the back of the sofa

Allah = Abrahamic God. It's just the word for "the god" in Arabic - not a name. Sorry for being so pedantic, but it's an important point.

In the West, Allah is reserved for the Islamic concept of God. But you are correct that in Arabic, it means plainly God.

Nah it's kind of more like, proove the universe has existed for an eternity and has never had a beggining.


Actually, the issue is nothing like that at all. The universe exists within human beings ability to collect information about it. As such, human beings can directly access and gain knowledge about the universe. They cannot do so about God.


And no the big bang is not the beggining of our universe, just the universe as we know it. Matter existed before the big bang.

Unless one has the ability to directly experience whatever it is was that was before the "big bang" event (the ability to see past a singularity in physical space and time, as it were), I see no reason to accept any of the above either.

I have a notion of something, but am unsure whether or not it is necessarily God. Does that count?

Any deity, not necessarily God as defined by the Church. Or the notion that there is no deity. Or any notion in between about a deity. Or the notion could be about deities. Have I defined it well enough for you?

Wow.

I wish I could word my arguments in such a way! Anyone who does not understand that is, well, not attempting to!

Perhaps politics did have an influence on religion. To some, however, that may appear as just another anarchic accusation of the government / corporations, etc. [Hint: not to me :)]

Yeah, he put it in an excellent way. The only recourse for believers here is (1), which for them usually translates to "test of faith". Of course, there's also the theory that God hides because he wants us to be able to choose for ourselves whether we believe in him or not; otherwise we would have no choice but to believe, no free will.

That brings up the question of why, if he exists, God created us in the first place, but I don't think anyone has ever been able to answer that.

Actually, the issue is nothing like that at all. The universe exists within human beings ability to collect information about it. As such, human beings can directly access and gain knowledge about the universe. They cannot do so about God.


Irellivant. The question about disprooving the existance of God is still disprooving that the Universe had a beggining.


Unless one has the ability to directly experience whatever it is was that was before the "big bang" event (the ability to see past a singularity in physical space and time, as it were), I see no reason to accept any of the above either.

Just read 99% of all science articles about it then.

I KNOW I reject the concept of belief. I don't believe in things; I either know [of] them or I don't.

You could say that's akin to saying "I've never seen, nor heard of the existance of some people, therefore they don't exist." Actually, it's not. I have the knowledge that there are people I have not met, things I have not done nor seen.

Okay. I have knowledge that a man born af an allegedly virgin womb, named Yeshua (transcribed into english as Jesus), walked about Judea circa 30 A.D., and said things like "Judge not lest ye be judged", "When someone strikes you in the right cheek, turn the other cheek to him so he may strike you there also", "Give unto Caesar what is Caesars, give unto God what is God's". I know he existed, I know he said and did great things, and I know he must be divine.

But then again, what do I know? Like Socrates, all I know is that I know nothing. I actually just believe a lot of things. I don't pretend to know anything, because for all I know this is just a huge LSD trip, and I'll wake up tomorrow.

I "found" it when I started to learn about religion on my own. I created my own polytheistic, Taoist belief system through my own investigations and meditation rather than having it imposed on me by parents or authority figures.

Actually, the issue is nothing like that at all. The universe exists within human beings ability to collect information about it. As such, human beings can directly access and gain knowledge about the universe. They cannot do so about God.



Unless one has the ability to directly experience whatever it is was that was before the "big bang" event (the ability to see past a singularity in physical space and time), I see no reason to accept any of the above either.

May I ask if you have particular beliefs?

Myself, I don't believe in anything, but I don't consider it Atheism. Yes, it's the rejection of god as a concept, but that covers only a small part of it. There are spirits, resurrection, and many other things to contend with as well.

I believe in nothing. Perhaps there is a name for that, but then that will be categorised under a faith.

I have no faith, no belief, I am (i.e. may be) merely experiencing what could or could not be existance, however it may be.

Things are just... there, there is nothing else extra but that which we have not, in this experience, experienced.

Agh, humans are complicated. Our words mean everything, yet at the same time mean nothing whatsoever.

Evolution, no matter how much evidence there is in support of it, is still far from being proven. I'll give you that a lot of the carbon dating and fossils and whatever else points to evolution (at least from the way they'e described in today's textbooks, but during Freud's times everyone though he was right too) but I am still far from convinced.
I heard that some religious nutjobs refuse to believe in it as it contradicts their faith. So there are some parts of the timeline that there are little or no fossils found. That doesn't matter, there is more than enough evidence to prove that evolution did happen. Or did I waste an entire term studying it in depth in my geology class? Oh well, so what happened then? Did God put the fossils there to test our faith, or was it all Satans fault? :rolleyes:
And I must admit, that while I have heard the law of conservation of energy, I can't say that I remember it fully. If I am correct it is that energy is neither created nor destroyed. I think you are really grasping for straws if my interpretation of this law is correct. The law is referring to the creation or destruction of energy within the universe or world or whatever you want to call it. Because God would be outside the universe (assuming He created it) He would not be affected by the laws he created. I don't think the law was ever to consider Creation at all. Rather it is referring to the relationship between things in the universe, not those things outside of it.
Yeah, yeah...he doesn't exist in our universe. He just looks in every now and then to start plagues and cause natural disasters on whim. You thought up a very good excuse for that one. I don't think I've been converted just yet though.

Just read 99% of all science articles about it then.


If one believes that my rejection of religious authority automatically constitutes an acceptance of scientific authority, one would be mistaken.

Irellivant. The question about disprooving the existance of God is still disprooving that the Universe had a beggining.

no it isn't. it is logically possible that the universe could have a beginning and there not be a god. conversely, it is also logically possible that the universe didn't have a beginning and there is a god.

yes,

All we know, is that we know nothing.

I'd say that's perfect.

If one believes that my rejection of religious authority automatically constitutes an acceptance of scientific authority, one would be mistaken.

Even so, if you are going to choose big bang theory (i am not saying you are) to explain how the universe began you have to know the whole theory and not some of it.

All we know, is that we know nothing.

I'd say that's perfect.

Thats an argument for agnostacism lol. Nice one :rolleyes:

no it isn't. it is logically possible that the universe could have a beginning and there not be a god. conversely, it is also logically possible that the universe didn't have a beginning and there is a god.

Not really, it is impossible for things to pop into existance for no reason without some other sort of force behind all of it.

Regardless of the truth regarding the existence or non-existence of a deity/deities, because I wholeheartedly reject any being who insists that I obey, I also reject religion in most of its manifestations.

Was raised as a Christian all my life, up until grade 9 when I lost faith in it. I spose I consider myself Agnostic now.

May I ask if you have particular beliefs?


Sure (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empiricism) do (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_skepticism).


Myself, I don't believe in anything


Yes you do. You just carefully tailor the definition of "belief" it make it seem like you don't (A "belief" is nothing more than an idea held to be true. Nothing about it is inherently or necessarily religious in nature).

Not really, it is impossible for things to pop into existance for no reason without some other sort of force behind all of it.

It is impossible within the framework of this universe.

This universe postdates the Big Bang.

Not really, it is impossible for things to pop into existance for no reason without some other sort of force behind all of it.

on what grounds is it logically impossible?

Thats an argument for agnostacism lol. Nice one :rolleyes:

I am not agnostic.
I am not atheist.
I am not christian.
I am not muslim.
I am not sikh.
I am not hindu.
I am not buddhist.
I am not taoist, maoist, confucian, jewish, you get the idea.

I don't believe in any way, however you may twist my wording to make it sound as though I believe.

All I know, as a part of this experience, however it may be outside of this experience, is that arguments for or against religion are a case of our species' language being not enough to convey everything. And taking up any language will not change this:

Every word has a definition, and that is it's downfall.

on what grounds is it logically impossible?

Well, the idea that "everything must have a cause and effect". And yeah you can say the same thing about God, but he does not exist in our universe and our understanding of it, so those laws dont really apply.

I am not agnostic.
I am not atheist.
I am not christian.
I am not muslim.
I am not sikh.
I am not hindu.
I am not buddhist.
I am not taoist, maoist, confucian, jewish, you get the idea.

I don't believe in any way, however you may twist my wording to make it sound as though I believe.

All I know, as a part of this experience, however it may be outside of this experience, is that arguments for or against religion are a case of our species' language being not enough to convey everything. And taking up any language will not change this:

Every word has a definition, and that is it's downfall.

That makes no sence, either you have not made up your mind (agnostacism) or realise that it is impossible for you to know about the existance of god (agnostacism)

Even so, if you are going to choose big bang theory (i am not saying you are) to explain how the universe began you have to know the whole theory and not some of it.

I make no such "choice," and I fail to see how the issue is even relevant (as Free Soviets already explained above, the "big bang theory" is not the opposite of, or "atheistic" alternative to, creationist/theistic assertions. Again, rejection of religious authority is not to automatically accept scientific authority).

Well, the idea that "everything must have a cause and effect". And yeah you can say the same thing about God, but he does not exist in our universe and our understanding of it, so those laws dont really apply.

Note the word "idea".

Nothing really exists, yet there is nothing that doesn't exist. It is something beyond us, especially with our having developed a method of communication resulting in codes and conventions too big for ourselves to comprehend.

I make no such "choice," and I fail to see how the issue is even relevant (as Free Soviets already explained above, the "big bang theory" is not the opposite of, or "atheistic" alternative to, creationist/theistic assertions. Again, rejection of religious authority is not to automatically accept scientific authority).

I did not say that. I just said that some people may think it is a way to disproove god.

......that is interesting, sort of unitarian with a heavy hindu/buddhist influence (cyclical time theory)...

the muhammed/buddha=god thing is especially fascinating seeing as how muhammed never claimed to be god, only his delivery boy ;)

how did you come about this conclusion?
Conclusion? This is but a snapshot of where I am at the minute. I am far from finished yet! ;)

Muhammed never claimed to be God. In fact, if anyone today told a Muslim that a given person could be God, they would be strongly opposed to the idea. I think this is a point Jesus of Nazareth was trying to make: Why can't a person be God? What is God such that no person can ever claim to be the same as him? Why can't God be here and at the same time where he was before?

It is essentially my view (if somewhat simplified) that every minute portion of reality is some aspect of the Divine Being. Or, rather, that the Divine Being is itself one way of personifying the deeper truth that is the Ultimate Existence.

So in line with how I view the Almighty, I believe Muhammed was indeed God, and his memory too continues to be God as well.

I did not say that. I just said that some people may think it is a way to disproove god.

Some people would be falling victim to flawed reasoning, for essentially the same reason that the theists fall victim to flawed reasoning. :)

Some people would be falling victim to flawed reasoning, for essentially the same reason that the theists fall victim to flawed reasoning. :)

That i can agree with.

Unless one has the ability to directly experience whatever it is was that was before the "big bang" event (the ability to see past a singularity in physical space and time, as it were), I see no reason to accept any of the above either.

Umm, you can't directly experience the "Big Bang" either. Unless, of course, you invented a time machine and have neglected to tell the scientific community that you know for a fact that the "theory" is actually a "fact." Just because its a common explanation doesn't mean its right. By your definition, our universe exists solely within the parameters of our understanding. That means deep sea creatures actually didn't exist until we saw them.


However, consider this. A ship is destroyed by a giant squid, after being mistaken for a whale. This was the first giant squid attack in history. Now, no one knows the giant squid exists. So, we attribute its work to a mythical creature called a Kraken, or whatever you wish to call it. Does that mean the giant squid doesn't exist? Nope, just that we didn't know about it yet. There are countless things left to be learned in our universe, and to be experienced. We discover new species every day. They existed before we could prove they were there. We don't know everything, and so your basis for belief seems to count out anything you don't understand.

That makes no sence, either you have not made up your mind (agnostacism) or realise that it is impossible for you to know about the existance of god (agnostacism)

It's impossible for me to know that it's impossible for me to know that it's impossible for me to know .................................................................................................... .................................................................................................... ......................................................................................(ad infinitum) about the existance of god.

Would you like to make a word for that?

There is no belief, just perception.

Any deity, not necessarily God as defined by the Church. Or the notion that there is no deity. Or any notion in between about a deity. Or the notion could be about deities. Have I defined it well enough for you?
Well, what is a deity? I am unsure whether or not the notion that I have involves deities at all, but it could do if I knew better what a deity was.

Well, the idea that "everything must have a cause and effect". And yeah you can say the same thing about God, but he does not exist in our universe and our understanding of it, so those laws dont really apply.


if it is possible that some things (like gods) can not have a cause, then it is possible to have a universe with a beginning but no cause.

It's impossible for me to know that it's impossible for me to know that it's impossible for me to know .................................................................................................... .................................................................................................... ......................................................................................(ad infinitum) about the existance of god.

Would you like to make a word for that?

There is no belief, just perception.

So you are an agnostic, because you have no idea.

I found Jesus yesterday.

He was hiding under the bed.

I was like, "dude...theres a lot of people looking for you..."

So you are an agnostic, because you have no idea.

I'm agnostic because I can't have an idea about it.

I am not agnostic.
I am not atheist.
I am not christian.
I am not muslim.
I am not sikh.
I am not hindu.
I am not buddhist.
I am not taoist, maoist, confucian, jewish, you get the idea.

I don't believe in any way, however you may twist my wording to make it sound as though I believe.

All I know, as a part of this experience, however it may be outside of this experience, is that arguments for or against religion are a case of our species' language being not enough to convey everything. And taking up any language will not change this:

Every word has a definition, and that is it's downfall.

Warning: If you haven't tried already do not DO NOT say this to a professor of religion and philosophy. Someone in my class suggested what you're saying and I swear the professor was about to punch him right in the face, she was so angry. They don't take kindly to the idea that their entire field of study is worthless.

That's not to say that I don't in some way agree with you.

Sometimes I really wish there was such knowledge, that everything was so easy. But... it's not. the frustration has no end, yet neither does the persistency.

In other words: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang:

Warning: If you haven't tried already do not DO NOT say this to a professor of religion and philosophy. Someone in my class suggested what you're saying and I swear the professor was about to punch him right in the face, she was so angry. They don't take kindly to the idea that their entire field of study is worthless.

That's not to say that I don't in some way agree with you.

No you shouldn't agree with him, he is just twisting the idea of agnostacism to make it sound more complex then it really is.

I think this is a point Jesus of Nazareth was trying to make: Why can't a person be God? What is God such that no person can ever claim to be the same as him? Why can't God be here and at the same time where he was before?

I don't recall Jesus himself claiming to be God, though. All of his works he specifically stated he committed through his Father, to whom he showed all respect and devotion. Jesus' works were completely dependent on God.


"This is my son, with whom I am well pleased."

Jesus works were dependent upon God granting him the power to act.

No you shouldn't agree with him, he is just twisting the idea of agnostacism to make it sound more complex then it really is.

From your perception.

I was forced-fed an Abrahamic religion until from 4-10 years old - I call it my 6 years of resistance. I caused so many fights in Sunday school they called me the Spartan. I also took a heavy object to a pastor's face on three separate occasions. The olds finally accepted I was religion-neutral.

From your perception.

From a dictionary's perception.

I am not twisting agnosticism to make it more complex, i am stating my perception, is the best way to describe it.

Perception and impossibility are perhaps the two key words here.

I am not twisting agnosticism to make it more complex, i am stating my perception, is the best way to describe it.

Perception and impossibility are perhaps the two key words here.

Maybe you could help out by differentiating your stance from agnosticism.

From a dictionary's perception.

You claim I am a dictionary, or that I derive my perception from a dictionary? Ridiculous.

No you shouldn't agree with him, he is just twisting the idea of agnostacism to make it sound more complex then it really is.

I agree more with the idea "human langauge can't describe the idea of God sufficiently". Not knowing or caring what to think is agnosticism, sure. What's wrong with being called an agnostic?

You claim I am a dictionary, or that I derive my perception from a dictionary? Ridiculous.

No i claim that you fit in the definition of an agnostic. That definition coming from a dictionary.

From a dictionary's perception.

He doesn't believe in dictionaries, so he doesn't have to acept your definition. ;)

Perception without conclusion seriously stunts learning, so I'm pretty sure his statements are far more dramatic than the reality of the situation.

Umm, you can't directly experience the "Big Bang" either. Unless, of course, you invented a time machine and have neglected to tell the scientific community that you know for a fact that the "theory" is actually a "fact." ... By your definition, our universe exists solely within the parameters of our understanding. That means deep sea creatures actually didn't exist until we saw them.


I understand. I actually was very hesitant to use the word "directly" in my post, because I realized that i was using it in a different sense than might otherwise be understood. I meant to use the word "directly" in the sense that human beings could gather knowledge with their own senses, rather than relying on "indirect" avenues like the word of a priest, etc. Yes, all of the evidence gathered in favor of the "big bang" theory are effects or results of the postulated event, instead of "direct" observation of the event itself. All I meant to assert, however, was that such evidence could be collected "directly" by human beings themselves via their senses, rather than by reliance on the supernatural or its supposed agents.


Just because its a common explanation doesn't mean its right.


Of course.

I don't recall Jesus himself claiming to be God, though. All of his works he specifically stated he committed through his Father, to whom he showed all respect and devotion. Jesus' works were completely dependent on God.


"This is my son, with whom I am well pleased."

Jesus works were dependent upon God granting him the power to act.
Well yes, but Jesus still asked the same questions of the temples in their understanding of God. He was a living challenge; Why can't I be God's Son? What is God such that this is impossible? And what if it were possible; what does that do to your ideas?

Maybe you could help out by differentiating your stance from agnosticism.

Agnosticism is a defined concept, a blanketcover put over everyone who chooses to be under it, (yet their differences still reside), which was created by but one person's beliefs. Everyone's beliefs are different - would you like to create a word for every single slight difference in belief?

Well yes, but Jesus still asked the same questions of the temples in their understanding of God. He was a living challenge; Why can't I be God's Son? What is God such that this is impossible? And what if it were possible; what does that do to your ideas?

Is Jesus quoted as calling himself God's Son in any Gospel other than John's? I don't remember.

Agnosticism is a defined concept, a blanketcover put over everyone who chooses to be under it, (yet their differences still reside), which was created by but one person's beliefs. Everyone's beliefs are different - would you like to create a word for every single slight difference in belief?

There are probably words to describe your belief, but it's still agnostic. Just like christianity is theism.

Agnosticism is a defined concept, a blanketcover put over everyone who chooses to be under it, (yet their differences still reside), which was created by but one person's beliefs. Everyone's beliefs are different - would you like to create a word for every single slight difference in belief?

You haven't answered the question. I mean, what is it that you believe that causes what you believe to not fall under agnosticism. If you can answer that, I think people will stop hounding you.

He doesn't believe in dictionaries, so he doesn't have to acept your definition. ;)

Perception without conclusion seriously stunts learning, so I'm pretty sure his statements are far more dramatic than the reality of the situation.

Perception without conclusion is eternal, however we try to conclude.

Perception without conclusion only applys to reality, or our perception of it.

I obviously conclude things as a part of education: if I didn't that would stunt my future.

It is incredibly complex, too complex for us.

Oh well.

They existed before we could prove they were there. We don't know everything, and so your basis for belief seems to count out anything you don't understand.

The falsity of such a basis is obvious, which is why I don't believe or assert it.

I don't claim that something doesn't exist if we cannot prove it exists (such reasoning is equally as flawed as that of the theist which I critisized in my original post to this thread). I claim that we cannot prove or disprove the existance of God, even if we tried. The supernatural exists beyond the human beings ability to naturally percieve it, without having to rely on the subjective claims or beliefs of any particular individual or authority. Thus, I can make no authoritative claim regarding the supernatural, one way or the other.

Obviously, this is not the case with the giant squid or any other entity existing within the natural universe, where authoritative claims regarding the existance or non-existance thereof are possible.

You haven't answered the question. I mean, what is it that you believe that causes what you believe to not fall under agnosticism. If you can answer that, I think people will stop hounding you.

I answered it as I saw fit.

I choose not to define my beliefs under a group, as there will always be differences somewhere, whether I know what they are or not.

I don't know. All I know is that I don't know.

It's too complex for me, I can't explain it. That's why I only percieve rather than conclude in the case of reality, religion and anything else that could potentially be fictional.

People were hounding me? Hmm. Oh well.

Erm, erm...how can I put this without offending people...fuck it, I'll just say it how I see it.

It's my belief that religions are just a load of superstitious nonsense and those that believe in them were brainwashed as a child or are just delusional or stupid. All these tales about God can't possibly be true. Of course, I'm sure that a few of you believe differently. But one of us has to be wrong, am I right? ;)

Anyway, I'll be making a poll to find out when most of you religious types first started to believe in fairies. I suspect most of you were taught at a young age by your parents. Maybe I'm wrong though, maybe you weren't brainwashed by your family and other religious nutjobs. If it turns out that all of you made an informed decision to believe in God as an adult, then I just might convert...

Don't hold your breath though, that's not likely to happen. I didn't make any promises. *Runs away*

Well occasionally I'll say I'm Discordian but mostly I'm not religious.
:fluffle: :fluffle: :fluffle: For you VH! :)

Is Jesus quoted as calling himself God's Son in any Gospel other than John's? I don't remember.

God called him his son. That means, if you accept the Gospels at face value, he was God's Son. However, we are all God's children. Ostensibly. I'm not preaching here. So, Jesus was God's Son, but with a far more direct relationship than we enjoy. That my understanding, and the main difference is immaculate conception. Mary was directly impregnated without having sex, according to the Gospels. So Jesus was physically the Son of God, or at least a half-son. We don't share that bond. However, being a christian is all about being a child of God.


/End preachy sounding post

I apologize, but thats just my understanding of scripture, and I don't mean to irritate those who aren't interested.

Perhaps the reason why I can't explain it is because I am young; only 15. (I'll await the jibes, but I won't particularly care about them)

Sorry, this is an overload for me, words can't explain too many things, or at least my words can't.

I answered it as I saw fit.

I choose not to define my beliefs under a group, as there will always be differences somewhere, whether I know what they are or not.

I don't know. All I know is that I don't know.

It's too complex for me, I can't explain it. That's why I only percieve rather than conclude in the case of reality, religion and anything else that could potentially be fictional.

People were hounding me? Hmm. Oh well.

I think you've been reading too many zen koans.

Or maybe it's because I didn't sleep until about 6 - 7 am last night (morning) ;)

I think you've been reading too many zen koans.

I don't know what a zen koan is :), I'm just answering as I want to.

Or maybe it's because I didn't sleep until about 6 - 7 am last night (morning) ;)

That'd make sense.

I don't know what a zen koan is :), I'm just answering as I want to.

You should check them out. I have a feeling you'd like them.

Mary was directly impregnated without having sex, according to the Gospels. So Jesus was physically the Son of God, or at least a half-son. We don't share that bond. However, being a christian is all about being a child of God.

/End preachy sounding post

I apologize, but thats just my understanding of scripture, and I don't mean to irritate those who aren't interested.

Okay. I've gotten a different story about the virgin birth, that it didn't imply the same closeness of Jesus to God that Christians apply to it. I see what you're saying, though.

The falsity of such a basis is obvious, which is why I don't believe or assert it.

I don't claim that something doesn't exist if we cannot prove it exists (such reasoning is equally as flawed as that of the theist which I critisized in my original post to this thread). I claim that we cannot prove or disprove the existance of God, even if we tried. The supernatural exists beyond the human beings ability to naturally percieve it, without having to rely on the subjective claims or beliefs of any particular individual or authority. Thus, I can make no authoritative claim regarding the supernatural, one way or the other.

Obviously, this is not the case with the giant squid or any other entity existing within the natural universe, where authoritative claims regarding the existance or non-existance thereof are possible.

I was just pointing out that we defined things as "supernatural" or "magical" 1000-2000 years ago that are now scientific fact. I think in our exploration of the universe we may well find proof of God's existence. Most artists like to be recognized for their work, and a universe is a big place. Who knows what we might find? Assuming we have time to explore.

Anyways, a lot of christians would be offended by this statement probably, but I think if God did so much in the past to show his presence, who's to say that he hasn't left fingerprints or a signature somewhere?

Not that I require such a discovery for belief, but just that I think it likely. Until then God remains a "supernatural" being.

Okay. I've gotten a different story about the virgin birth, that it didn't imply the same closeness of Jesus to God that Christians apply to it. I see what you're saying, though.

;)
Sure, I know its taught differently by different faiths. As long as the general idea gets across, I appreciate not getting into a debate on semantics.

You should check them out. I have a feeling you'd like them.

I'll be sure to check them out :)

All I care about in the case of these arguments is my perception. I understand others' beliefs and accept them as they are, but I really don't like people forcing their beliefs on others too young or unintelligent in the case of beliefs to comprehend them. These people will often accept their beliefs.

I just want everyone to believe whatever the heck they want to believe. Even if these involve things like heinous crimes, hey, it's their choice, and their choice to defy others using their beliefs.

Beliefs, beliefs, beliefs. Damn that word :p

Perception without conclusion is eternal, however we try to conclude.

Perception without conclusion only applys to reality, or our perception of it.

I obviously conclude things as a part of education: if I didn't that would stunt my future.

It is incredibly complex, too complex for us.

Oh well.

If you only perceive, but never use your perceptions to form concepts, which you claimed to reject, then you would be an animal, not a human being.

Now, if you selectively refuse to form conceptions and beliefs based on what you believe is an inability to understand the data in a certain subject, that means you are an agnostic in terms of religion. You see the information, but you don't consider yourself capable of reaching a decision based on what you know.

I was just pointing out that we defined things as "supernatural" or "magical" 1000-2000 years ago that are now scientific fact.

agreed.

I think in our exploration of the universe we may well find proof of God's existence. Most artists like to be recognized for their work,
yes, but most(if not all) artists are human, who knows what god thinks, or how he acts, assuming he exists

and a universe is a big place. Who knows what we might find? Assuming we have time to explore.

and what lies outside the universe? ,what does a matterless void look like;)

Anyways, a lot of christians would be offended by this statement probably, but I think if God did so much in the past to show his presence, who's to say that he hasn't left fingerprints or a signature somewhere?

Not that I require such a discovery for belief, but just that I think it likely. Until then God remains a "supernatural" being.


Agreed

I was just pointing out that we defined things as "supernatural" or "magical" 1000-2000 years ago that are now scientific fact.


Yes, but such were simply cases of mistaken classification or ignorance about the natural universe. God itself is supposed to be an entity completely independent and outside of the natural universe. As such, the cases are fundamentally different and cannot be accurately compared.

The orbit of the planets might have been considered "supernatural" until the natural forces of gravity and such where discovered and found to have existed the whole time. God is certainly also considered "supernatural," but I fail to see how similar natural forces can be found that will explain the existance and use of supernatural powers attributed to said god, as such a "natural" force would have had to bring itself into existance.

That flushing sound you hear is causality going down the toilet. :D

and what lies outside the universe? ,what does a matterless void look like;)


This problem is why I can believe. There's so much we don't know, I refuse to use the tiny index of scientific fact we've managed to accumulate in a few thousand years to base all my decisions on. I don't think it makes me ignorant, just open minded to the fact that we really don't know all that much.

After all we crashed a couple billion dollars worth of probe into Mars because we used both the Metric and Standard units of measurement for the landing and flight. A being that makes mistakes like that certainly isn't going to be my sole source of knowledge.

If you only perceive, but never use your perceptions to form concepts, which you claimed to reject, then you would be an animal, not a human being.

Now, if you selectively refuse to form conceptions and beliefs based on what you believe is an inability to understand the data in a certain subject, that means you are an agnostic in terms of religion. You see the information, but you don't consider yourself capable of reaching a decision based on what you know.

Sure; whatever. Give a name to it if you want. I am not agnostic, I am myself.

I have come to the conclusion: there is no one conclusion. Surely that is not an agnostic belief.

Yes, but such were simply cases of mistaken classification or ignorance about the natural universe. God itself is supposed to be an entity completely independent and outside of the natural universe. As such, the cases are fundamentally different and cannot be accurately compared.

The orbit of the planets might have been considered "supernatural" until the natural forces of gravity and such where discovered and found to have existed the whole time. God is certainly also considered "supernatural," but I fail to see how similar natural forces can be found that will explain the existance and use of supernatural powers attributed to said god, as such a "natural" force would have had to have brought itself into existance.

That flushing sound you hear is causality going down the toilet. :D

But you use your perception of reality. An incomplete understanding based on limited knowledge. What makes electrons "jump"? What would have caused the Big Bang? After all, if that matter was compressed, why did it stay compressed as long as it did. What caused the change?

Science does not define the nature of the universe, but it does provide a reasonable description of it. However, that description constantly fluxuates.

That flushing sound you hear is causality going down the toilet. :D

I think casuality went away a long time ago :D

I hope it comes back with tea and cakes. :)

Not toilet stained, of course.

With that, I leave you. I have to go to sleep now or I think I might collapse. Night all!

I answered it as I saw fit.

I choose not to define my beliefs under a group, as there will always be differences somewhere, whether I know what they are or not.

I don't know. All I know is that I don't know.

It's too complex for me, I can't explain it. That's why I only percieve rather than conclude in the case of reality, religion and anything else that could potentially be fictional.

People were hounding me? Hmm. Oh well.

You are still an agnostic, weather you call yourself one or not.

After all, if that matter was compressed, why did it stay compressed as long as it did. What caused the change?


I don't know. And because I don't know, I'm not going to make up some supernatural realm (even further beyond my ability to know, as a matter of fact) in order to pretend to understand something that I do not.

However, that description constantly fluxuates.

So we don't have all the answers immediately and on demand. So what? Again, I don't feel the need to rely on that which is not subject to human knowledge of any kind, direct or indirect, in order to pretend to understand what I do not.

Is this really what religion is all about? People who are afraid to say "I don't know?" What is so hard about admitting the truth? Again, I think it goes back to my original hypothesis: admitting ignorance undermines the ability of human authorities to justify said authority and power. Thus, the "divine right of kings," as it were. (edit: and since science requires admitting one's initial ignorance, science runs in direct opposition to this tendency; note the correlation between the rise of scientific knowledge and the fall of the aforementioned kings.)

My dad is Catholic and my mom is Unitarian Universalist. I was raised in both churches because my parents thought it would be good for me to get more than one view on things.

I ended up choosing to be a Unitarian Universalist, though I don't think my parents would have objected if I had chosen neither Unitarian Universalism nor the Catholic Church.

Erm, erm...how can I put this without offending people...fuck it, I'll just say it how I see it.

It's my belief that religions are just a load of superstitious nonsense and those that believe in them were brainwashed as a child or are just delusional or stupid. All these tales about God can't possibly be true. Of course, I'm sure that a few of you believe differently. But one of us has to be wrong, am I right? ;)

Anyway, I'll be making a poll to find out when most of you religious types first started to believe in fairies. I suspect most of you were taught at a young age by your parents. Maybe I'm wrong though, maybe you weren't brainwashed by your family and other religious nutjobs. If it turns out that all of you made an informed decision to believe in God as an adult, then I just might convert...

Don't hold your breath though, that's not likely to happen. I didn't make any promises. *Runs away*
Did you have to try to be so unoriginal?

The jealousy of atheists is always amazing. Yes, you are missing out on something, but it is open to you too, you know. You can fill that little void in your life in a much better way than simply trying to deny it exists. :)

I don't know. And because I don't know, I'm not going to make up some supernatural realm (even further beyond my ability to know, as a matter of fact) in order to pretend to understand something that I do not.



So we don't have all the answers immediately and on demand. So what? Again, I don't feel the need to rely on that which is not subject to human knowledge of any kind, direct or indirect, in order to pretend to understand what I do not.

Is this really what religion is all about? People who are afraid to say "I don't know?" What is so hard about admitting the truth? Again, I think it goes back to my original hypothesis: admitting ignorance undermines the ability of human authorities to justify said authority and power. Thus, the "divine right of kings," as it were.


But those people all had direct experiences with this being. They DID know. If God spoke to me, you wouldn't be able to convince me he didn't exist, no matter what you called me. That would count as proof. Seeing as how they didn't have video cameras, etc. there is no possibility of any proof remaining today. My point is that defining God as supernatural could be inaccurate. Perhaps he is part of nature, in a way that we haven't yet defined. Thus, we call him supernatural because his abilities exceed our understanding of the natural universe, which is limited.

I found it when I went to the fiction section!

*audience groans*

(edit: and since science requires admitting one's initial ignorance, science runs in direct opposition to this tendency; note the correlation between the rise of scientific knowledge and the fall of the aforementioned kings.)

And science also doesn't allow for inaccuracy, which is why scientists have come off as being so arrogant. However, scientists "factual" conclusions have been proven wrong on occasion. Then, science is revised. So, for science to exist you must first admit there is a lot you don't understand, and then try to understand it. Also, on occasion we find things that science can't understand. However, that could be a function of our present capabilities. Religion also requires admitting ignorance. Take that from a Christian. You have to learn as you grow as a Christian. Don't make statements about religion that are completely false simple to prove your point. Scientists have risen and fallen in their fields just like those kings rose and fell in their countries. Fallacy crosses all boundaries.

I don't know. And because I don't know, I'm not going to make up some supernatural realm

most proponents of the big-bang theory say gravity is the culprit, the findins of Dr. Hubble(the universe is shrinking) seem to support this idea.

But what is gravity? We don't know, some say sub-atomic particles called gravitrons are to blame, other suggest einstein's space-time coninueum bend theory, still others say it is the 5th dimension, thats right we aren't even sure what dimension we're in. :D

But those people all had direct experiences with this being. They DID know.


So they claim, at any rate. Again, provide me evidence of existance/non-existance that does not rely on that which my own senses cannot directly experience. In other words, provide me with evidence that does not require me to simply accept someone's promise that he is not a liar.

Also, there are any number of natural phenomina, not relying on the supernatural, which explain such supposedly religious revelation. Voices in the head are a common symptom of any number of mental illness or injury. Being "at one with the universe" has been citied as a description of the feeling one gets when the center of the brain tasked with differentiating objects (including one's self from other external objects) malfunctions. Et cetera, et cetera.


If God spoke to me, you wouldn't be able to convince me he didn't exist, no matter what you called me. That would count as proof.


Satan just called and he told me that God doesn't actually exist. Guess that's proof too.

(of course, having no basis outside of my own subjective claim which cannot be confirmed or experienced by anyone else, it isn't :) )


My point is that defining God as supernatural could be inaccurate. Perhaps he is part of nature, in a way that we haven't yet defined. Thus, we call him supernatural because his abilities exceed our understanding of the natural universe, which is limited.

Then God isn't really a god, is it? If he or she exists within the natural universe, then his or her powers are limited by definition (unless, again, we somehow want to conclude that natural forces allow supernatural behavior). Or, all of his or her "supernatural" powers are made up fairy tales (which is the most likely conclusion...how could a natural being have created the universe, and, therefore, itself? *flushes causality again*), in which case God is nothing more than a trickster at best (or a tyrannical dictator, at worst) hardly deserving of worship anymore than any other natural authority figure. Again, nothing more than the "diving right of kings."

most proponents of the big-bang theory say gravity is the culprit, the findins of Dr. Hubble(the universe is shrinking) seem to support this idea.

But what is gravity? We don't know, some say sub-atomic particles called gravitrons are to blame, other suggest einstein's space-time coninueum bend theory, still others say it is the 5th dimension, thats right we aren't even sure what dimension we're in. :D

Again, so what? :) (edit: admitting my ignorance does not require acceptance of religious explainations. I am perfectly happy being ignorant. It gives me reason and opportunity to discover something new.)

Religion also requires admitting ignorance.

This hasn't been my personal experience in the churches that I have attended myself, but I suppose it is possible.

Again, so what? :)

good point if a news report came on and said a team of MIT scientist conclud we are actually in 76643892210th dimesion i'd be like
"whatever lady on TV"

1. So they claim, at any rate. Again, provide me evidence of existance/non-existance that does not rely on that which my own senses cannot directly experience. In other words, provide me with evidence that does not require me to simply accept someone's promise that he is not a liar.

2. Also, there are any number of natural phenomina, not relying on the supernatural, which explain such supposedly religious revelation. Voices in the head are a common symptom of any number of mental illness or injury. Being "at one with the universe" has been citied as a description of the feeling one gets when the center of the brain tasked with differentiating objects (including one's self from other external objects) malfunctions. Et cetera, et cetera.



3. Satan just called and he told me that God doesn't actually exist. Guess that's proof too.

(of course, having no basis outside of my own subjective claim which cannot be confirmed or experienced by anyone else, it isn't :) )



4. Then God isn't really a god, is it? If he or she exists within the natural universe, then his or her powers are limited by definition (unless, again, we somehow want to conclude that natural forces allow supernatural behavior). Or, all of his or her "supernatural" powers are made up fairy tales (which is the most likely conclusion...how could a natural being have created the universe, and, therefore, itself? *flushes causality again*), in which case God is nothing more than a trickster at best (or a tyrannical dictator, at worst) hardly deserving of worship anymore than any other natural authority figure. Again, nothing more than the "diving right of kings."

1. I've never claimed we had such evidence now. Please don't be difficult, as I'm being perfectly reasonable. I just suggested that its presence was possible, even probable if God exists.

2. However, if an entire people saw bread fall from the sky, that wouldn't be a single person's delusion. Or a sea part. Miracles were performed for hundreds of people. If you choose not to believe those stories, then thats perfectly fine. It would be impossible to have evidence now to prove those events occurred, other than written documentation.

3. If you know you are lying, then it isn't. If you are telling the truth, then it happened. You know the difference. I never said God talking to me was proof for you. I said it would be proof for me. And you would know the difference, I think.

4. Again, you apply your concept of reality and nature. One which is based on incomplete information. There are plenty of natural processes that you don't understand, but someone else does. You have no idea exactly how gravity works, or how quantam physics works, or exactly how entropy works, or why any of these proven natural processes exist. But you know that science has an answer, in some cases. But not all. Then, you decide to discount anything not in that explanation as hocus pocus. To you, it seems impossible. To someone else, it might seem mundane. Doesn't it seem arrogant to apply human perceptions to the universe as a whole, when we barely understand our tiny speck in the universe?

As a child, I was catholic..

Religion has no place in my life. Nor will it ever again.

I just suggested that its presence was possible...


If we presume that God exists in the first place. c = 2πr.


2. However, if an entire people saw bread fall from the sky, that wouldn't be a single person's delusion.


No, it wouldn't. That would more likely be mass hysteria.


It would be impossible to have evidence now to prove those events occurred, other than written documentation.


And of all the people who swear that Battlefield Earth (or the Koran, or the Tanakh, or some hyroglyphics on the wall of a tomb...) is written documentation of actual events? Whose written documentation of actual events is the real deal?


3. If you know you are lying, then it isn't. If you are telling the truth, then it happened. You know the difference.


First, self-delusion is another well documented psychological event.

Second, even if that was true, other people still have no means of objectively sharing my knowledge without the possibility that I am in fact a liar, meaning...


And you would know the difference, I think.


...that the difference is entirely irrevelant for gaining knowledge of the objective truth about the nature of reality. Reality is not what I swear occurs between my own ears. :)


To you, it seems impossible.


Review of this thead will reveal that I have stated nothing more than that I can draw no authoritative conclusion regarding the supernatural, one way or another. Claiming that God does not exist is equally as absurd as claiming that it does.


Doesn't it seem arrogant to apply human perceptions to the universe as a whole, when we barely understand our tiny speck in the universe?

On the contrary, what is arrogant is claiming to understand, or have an explaination for, what I do not understand. Which is exactly the purpose that religion serves. ;)

I grew up as a Catholic, and I still am Catholic.

Was religious when I was younger. I got better.

It's my belief that religions are just a load of superstitious nonsense and those that believe in them were brainwashed as a child or are just delusional or stupid. All these tales about God can't possibly be true. Of course, I'm sure that a few of you believe differently. But one of us has to be wrong, am I right? ;)
Almost completely agree. I'm not against religion itself, but every religion that actually exists now is a load of bullshit imo. If someone can back up a religion with true scientific fact, I'll be happy to convert.

I don't recall Jesus himself claiming to be God, though. All of his works he specifically stated he committed through his Father, to whom he showed all respect and devotion. Jesus' works were completely dependent on God.


"This is my son, with whom I am well pleased."

Jesus works were dependent upon God granting him the power to act.

Yes, the closest he even came to saying he was the son of God was when he was directly asked and he said, "Of course". I was taught in Bible study at the UU's youth program (YRUU) that this meant that he is and we all are too.

I heard that some religious nutjobs refuse to believe in it as it contradicts their faith. So there are some parts of the timeline that there are little or no fossils found. That doesn't matter, there is more than enough evidence to prove that evolution did happen. Or did I waste an entire term studying it in depth in my geology class? Oh well, so what happened then? Did God put the fossils there to test our faith, or was it all Satans fault? :rolleyes:

Yeah, yeah...he doesn't exist in our universe. He just looks in every now and then to start plagues and cause natural disasters on whim. You thought up a very good excuse for that one. I don't think I've been converted just yet though.

The weight from the Flood did it. Possibly. I wasn't there, I don't know. I do know that there needs to be something telling beyond doubt that God had to have done it that way before I will believe it. Otherwise, I will maintain the system of teachings that define my whole belief system which is based on the idea that Scripture is the highest authority of revelation given to Man being not only inerrant but also infallible.

Well, what is a deity? I am unsure whether or not the notion that I have involves deities at all, but it could do if I knew better what a deity was.

A superior being in some way linked to the universe the much more powerful than those purely in the universe.

http://frozenreality.co.uk/comic/bunny/index.php?id=173

;)

I grew up without any religion & have remained that way.

Edit: best t-shirt I've seen.

I'VE FOUND JESUS!

He was behind the couch the whole time.

http://frozenreality.co.uk/comic/bunny/index.php?id=173

;)

I love you.

*humps*

Yes, the closest he even came to saying he was the son of God was when he was directly asked and he said, "Of course". I was taught in Bible study at the UU's youth program (YRUU) that this meant that he is and we all are too.

Would you mind quoting from scripture?