Virtual Teen Forums
 

Go Back   Virtual Teen Forums > >
Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read Chat Room

View Poll Results: What is your religion?
Agnosticism 138 13.46%
Atheism 308 30.05%
Buddhism 12 1.17%
Christianity (Please Specify) 407 39.71%
Hinduism 9 0.88%
Islam 33 3.22%
Judaism 17 1.66%
Wicca 17 1.66%
Other (Please Specify) 84 8.20%
Voters: 1025. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old June 29th, 2009, 05:09 PM   #1021
INFERNO
Awesome Poster
 
INFERNO's Forum Picture
 
Join Date: December 27, 2008
Location: Canada
Gender: Male
Default Re: Religion

Quote:
Originally Posted by trevor20800 View Post
Big Bang Theory and the theory of evolution is that, what caused it. What caused everything to explode in the big bang theory. There was not more matter, because according to the law of conservation of matter, matter can not be created or destroyed, so there would be nothing to cause the "big bang" to happen. So if it did happen, what caused it??? and where was all of this matter that was the size of a speck located?
We are not entirely sure as to what exactly caused it. For the location of the speck, how do you plan to define its location? We usually would try to give its location in comparison to something else but if there is nothing else there, then how are we meant to give a precise location?

Quote:
Originally Posted by trevor20800 View Post
Evolution says we evolved from single celled organisms. How is that possible they are single celled, and if that did happen, wouldn't it be cancer! (cancer is the over reproduction of cells). So, if evolution did happend, what casued us to slowly change over time. How did a fish suddenly come out of the water and breath. And what fish did it mate and survive with it to give it legs and arms. That is not how breeding works.
Cancer is much more than over-reproduction of cells but I'll save you the molecular genetics explanations of it. In simple terms, you have single-celled organisms that "bind" with other single-celled organisms. Keep doing this and you can easily see how a multi-cellular organism can arise.

Evolution has numerous forces, some of them include mutation, natural selection, genetic drift, etc... . For your fish example, there is a type of fish still alive called a lungfish because it has lungs and can breath outside of the water. Any one of these forces could have caused the development of the lungs allowing it to flop on land until it found another water place.

Quote:
Originally Posted by trevor20800 View Post
all of this must be cause by something and weather it did happen or not, something must have caused it! done!
And your point is?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
You truly believe that it's possible that there's no true science? If you're athiest, how else does this world work? And if you're not arguing to try to promote or dispel God, then what are you arguing for? The quote you gave me looked quite anti-religous to me.
Yes I do believe it is possible for the world to survive without science. I see no reason why it would be unable to survive. Perhaps the inhabitants on the Earth would not fare very well but the world nonetheless would continue to survive.

Right now, I'm arguing against an atheist whose views I do not agree with about religion. There is no reason why I must argue for or against god while being an atheist. I'm perfectly happy if others believe in it while I don't. I don't see why an atheist would have to argue for or against god.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
But that seems to be a difficult way in which to do it. Basically, are you saying that you can find religious texts or similar items and say why they were written and what the ycould mean in a non-religous sense? Are you saying that you could say that it needn't have anything to do with God since it can be seen from a non-religious persective and has certain morals in it?
It may be difficult, however, it adheres to the philosophy of religion and does not mix science into it.

You're coming closer to understanding it, however, you're still not getting it. It is using a religious paradigm and it is being viewed from a religious perspective.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
I suppose that faith does prove that you are devoted to something but if that's all it does, then that's little proof. If some stranger were to come up to you, you a dagger and say "God has spoken to me. He has said that those with faith shall reap great rewards. You are to give this dagger to another man and tell them to plunge it in their chest. That person should have faith in me, the lord their god and in doing so, will not be hurt but instead will have great wisdom afterwards, njoy good health for the rest of their life, have special privallages in heaven, and enjoy more money than they've ever dreamed off while still on Earth. You must give this dagger to someone and test them.", would you do it?
I don't know how many times I have to say it: RELIGION DOES NOT NEED THE PROOF THAT SCIENCE DOES. Would I do it? No, I'd probably refuse to take the dagger but if I had to, I'd take the dagger home or somewhere else but not use it. May just have it as a nice ornament if anything.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
Would you have blind faith and stab yourself? or would you walk away and leave it? I don't like having faith because there's nothing to tell me that it's true. other peoples' faith will not satisfy me since the could say pretty much anythign and I'd have to believe it. I don't want to be blind like that. One thing that I do agree with you about however is that the book called "The Bible" (I refuse to just call it "the Bible" since it implies that it is a special book beyond the rest and that is bullshit - call me picky) is not evidence but only suggests that said content exists in peoples' minds. It all exists for them. One question though; does that mean that it truly exists?
Your own faith in theory would be good enough to make it true for yourself. If someone else has faith in something different, then you always have a choice. You don't need to believe in what they believe as being true or false.

Are you asking if the bible truly exists? I think it does, yes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
So what are scientific facts then? Is science not based on facts? It must be since science is always proved so it's factual. Religion on the other hand is based on faith which is no evidence because you could say anything and use it as evidence wheras science looks for the answers without making them up to what they want it to be. Science even admits that there are things that are not understood and hav yet ot be explained. Religion on the other hand, 'knows it all'. Do you really thinks so? Really? Also, why would God answer one person but not another? If one truly believes that God has answered him, they are either hallucinating, or assuming God has helped them when in reality it was something completely different.
Science is heavily based on scientific theories which in no way are facts. Science is always proved? No, you can show that something may be true or false but that does not mean that it is 100% or 0% true or false.

Faith is not meant to have evidence to satisfy science.

Science and religion both use paradigms, although the paradigms have a different focus. Religion and science could both be given the same phenomenon yet give completely different views on it. So, science does look for things that will satisfy it as does religion.

The "knowing it all" part to me is simply a reflection of someone's faith being very strong. It can be both good and bad. I'm not sure I agree with it though because it can violate their own religious beliefs.

You're right, it could be something completely different but they view it as god having answered their prayers. However, the issue with that is the argument as it would apply to you, that is, god has answered your prayers but you view it as something else. You see the problem now that we are faced with is your word. Only you can be the most reliable source to tell me if that is correct or not, I can suggest it may be right or wrong, and I could bring in a devout believer to give me their answer on it. We're then left with your word vs. theirs. The argument on whether he answered each of your prayers probably will go nowhere because it's simply a "yes-no" back and forth.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
Say, Nick prays to God and asks him to make him do well in his football match. God does not actually speak to him (in the same way as standard, person-to-person conversations) as far as he's concerned but when he ends up doing well in the match, he then says that God has answered his prayer and his faith is maintained. What do I think? Rubbish; it was not God that made him do well, it's all the practice and effort he put into it as well as the perfomance of his teamates who would have needed to help as well as pot luck and the perfomance of the opposition - it has nothing to do with God as I see it.
That is also completely true. However, hopefully you're understanding what a paradigm is (you gave a good example of it in this). His paradigm is a religious one whereas yours is not, so he is inclined to view it and use religious beliefs for it. You on the other hand, use a different paradigm.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
INFERNO, if you cannot argue in the same way that you just asked me to, it suggests that you are not even able to. Why ask me to do something you can't do yourself? I do agree that you should let people just believe in whatever wild nonsence the like, just so long as they do not preach and if you are on a religion debate, that is a pretty poor argument to use. We are here to debate religion - why tell people to just let people speculate without facts? Why tell people not to debate? Seems pointless to me. And yes, I understand that some religous people are so tied down to one of many deities, but that doesn't mean that you could make them consider other possibilities and be more open-minded on a debate now does it? You do however, have a bit of a point here.
I can do it myself all I want, however, I choose not to because I see it as pointless and probably wasting my time. I also have no reason to do so whereas you seem much more inclined to do so, so why not let you? My only reason would be to satisfy you and frankly, I don't care about satisfying you one way or another. I can easily pick up some biblical passages and scream "God doesn't exist!!!" but I have no real reason to do so.

You're correct, I could try to make them more open-minded but then comes a few questions. First, if they are so devoted, then what are the chances of me changing their views? Not very high. Second, do I have any reason for making them more open-minded other than simply to make them more open-minded?

Wait... you allow others to believe in what they want as long as they do not preach? Funny, you going around trying to show god doesn't exist seems awfully close to preaching to me. Back with your example about Nick and the football game, you go against his possible argument and even called his view rubbish. I'm having a hard time believing that you allow others to freely believe.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
See the above. I hate it when religious people say stuff exists and use nthing to back it up. Faith won't do for the reasons that I gave above as well. We should be debating here and thus, refuting others' beliefs with facts and whatnot should be allowed. Likewise, they can do it to me for all I care; so long as they do not expect me to believe stuff without backing it up and explaining the why of it. This would not be preaching. It would only be preaching if they did it outside a debate and simply talk about God as if he exists wihout any proof at all.
If faith won't do, then the question becomes, what will satisfy you? If you say science, then we both know that it won't be a happening thing. For religion, what facts do you propose to be used? Toss around whatever quotes from religious books, give our interpretations on them, and similar stuff?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
A lot of scientific facts suggest that God doesn't exist. I have heard about this wasp that have their homes in a hole in the ground. They go off to find food for their young in the hole but first, learn the appearance of the area so that they can find it again. When they return with food, they then put it doen and chekc to see if anything is blocking the hole. In the incredible likely event that nothing is blocking it, they then pick the food up and bring it in. Well, one glitch there I'm afraid. One person, when the wasp was checking, he moved the food. The wasp went to ehere it left the food only to find it missing. Consequently, the wasp looked around and then saw it. It then moved the food to the hole and then dropped it just outside and checked the hole again. Naturaully, the man moved the food again and the wasp did the same hting over and over. Basically, the wasp kept re-checking the hole everytime and was not intelligent enough to understand what was going on and thus, the food never entered the hole until the man finally got bored.
That is a scientific fact?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
INFERNO, this is a scientific fact. Now tell me, did God create unintellgent and flawed wasp? Wouldn't God have created something better which wouldn't be fooled by such simple things? Let's have another exapmle. When giving birth, the anatomy used is shaped to help the baby come out in only one position. If the baby is in any other position, it becomes a whole lot more complicated. Okay, so a lot of the time, the baby comes out correctly, however, this isn't always the case and things get ugly and difficult. Now tell me, did God design this flawed system? Would he not have allowed the baby to come out in several different positonis and allow appropiate anatomy to support this? There are many other scientific facts that question the power or existacne of God. Please think about what I've said.
Hold on, so your argument is that since something is flawed in some way, then that means god does not exist and/or is not very powerful? In the bible, it makes it very clear that humans are not as powerful nor as perfect as god. About non-humans, this is a reflection of the social times at that time when it was written: humans were considered much more important than other animals, so your wasp example is not really applicable because the bible is for humans not for other animals. Your wasp argument is then void.

Now, if I understand you correctly, you're telling me that a scientific fact is an observation of something. So since science is based on scientific theories, which are not facts, then science is therefore factual? The observations can be facts but the theories explaining them in no way are facts.

"That is my ambition, to have killed more people, more helpless people, than any man or woman who has ever lived." - Jane Toppan

"There's a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, it's just a son of a bitch getting there" - Sully Erna of Godsmack
INFERNO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 30th, 2009, 01:25 PM   #1022
Death
Awesome Poster
 
Death's Forum Picture
 
Join Date: May 2, 2009
Location: Britain
Age: 23
Gender: Male
Default Re: Religion

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
Yes I do believe it is possible for the world to survive without science. I see no reason why it would be unable to survive. Perhaps the inhabitants on the Earth would not fare very well but the world nonetheless would continue to survive.
When I said 'science', I didn't mean it as in the theory of science makes the world work, I meant the scientific laws themselves. What makes a body work? Why are teh bodis able to move, eat, sleep and so on? It's the science (moreover, biology) that makes i all work. What makes a twig drop when you let go of it? Gravity which is a law based on physics. It's basically these things that all make the world work instead of simply being empty and inanimate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
I don't know how many times I have to say it: RELIGION DOES NOT NEED THE PROOF THAT SCIENCE DOES. Would I do it? No, I'd probably refuse to take the dagger but if I had to, I'd take the dagger home or somewhere else but not use it. May just have it as a nice ornament if anything.
If what you are saying is true, then as far as I'm concerned, stuff religion. No proof or logical explainations? Then I'll not listen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
Your own faith in theory would be good enough to make it true for yourself. If someone else has faith in something different, then you always have a choice. You don't need to believe in what they believe as being true or false.
Making something true for yourself is only speculation. It doesn't mean that it's really true. Say that as far as I'm concerned, I'm invincible then I jump of a cliff, are you saying that I won't die becuase to myself, I cannot die?

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
Are you asking if the bible truly exists? I think it does, yes.
'The Bible' does exist, yes. Is the religion it teaches and enforces true? No. If you think it is, you are not athiest.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
Science is heavily based on scientific theories which in no way are facts. Science is always proved? No, you can show that something may be true or false but that does not mean that it is 100% or 0% true or false.
I know that there are theories, however, there are some facts that we know shch are defintely true and they are scientific and these theories are made from careful research instad of reckless imaginings and wild speculation which has come from nowhere.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
The "knowing it all" part to me is simply a reflection of someone's faith being very strong. It can be both good and bad. I'm not sure I agree with it though because it can violate their own religious beliefs.
True, it proves that they are devout however that can easily lead to narrow-mindedness and I hate that. I do not mind religious people and I don't argue with them, except here for obvious reasons.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
You're right, it could be something completely different but they view it as god having answered their prayers. However, the issue with that is the argument as it would apply to you, that is, god has answered your prayers but you view it as something else. You see the problem now that we are faced with is your word. Only you can be the most reliable source to tell me if that is correct or not, I can suggest it may be right or wrong, and I could bring in a devout believer to give me their answer on it. We're then left with your word vs. theirs. The argument on whether he answered each of your prayers probably will go nowhere because it's simply a "yes-no" back and forth.
If somebody refuses to listen to my words of wisdom that I took more effort to get than they did for teirs for obvious reasons, so be it. Let them believe in whatever far-fetched and unproved stuff they wish.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
That is also completely true. However, hopefully you're understanding what a paradigm is (you gave a good example of it in this). His paradigm is a religious one whereas yours is not, so he is inclined to view it and use religious beliefs for it. You on the other hand, use a different paradigm.
Again, if someone refuses to look for the factual truth instead of just making something up, let them. Not here though since we are debating.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
I can do it myself all I want, however, I choose not to because I see it as pointless and probably wasting my time. I also have no reason to do so whereas you seem much more inclined to do so, so why not let you? My only reason would be to satisfy you and frankly, I don't care about satisfying you one way or another. I can easily pick up some biblical passages and scream "God doesn't exist!!!" but I have no real reason to do so.
Well, that's dissapointed me since I seriously believed that you would do it. If you really won't though, then nor will I. I will argue about religion in my own way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
Wait... you allow others to believe in what they want as long as they do not preach? Funny, you going around trying to show god doesn't exist seems awfully close to preaching to me. Back with your example about Nick and the football game, you go against his possible argument and even called his view rubbish. I'm having a hard time believing that you allow others to freely believe.
INFERNO, you're wrong. I am not preaching since this is a debate. If somebody wants to try to dissprove the 'truth' behind athiesm, let them. Why? Because we are in a debate. Outside of debates however, they should shut the hell up. I for one, wouldn't preach since I am better than that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
If faith won't do, then the question becomes, what will satisfy you? If you say science, then we both know that it won't be a happening thing. For religion, what facts do you propose to be used? Toss around whatever quotes from religious books, give our interpretations on them, and similar stuff?
I want to be able to see things and conduct experiments that show they exist. You can;t d that with religion. Say, you build a campfire and pray to God to ask him to set it alight just to see if he exists. When you realise it hasn't happened, that only suggests he's non-existant or useless or ignorant. And don't say that it's not on fire to you since when you throw yourself in it, you won't die. The fire can't be lit and non-existant at the same time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
That is a scientific fact?
Of course. In fact, I get the feeling that you're dodging my point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
Hold on, so your argument is that since something is flawed in some way, then that means god does not exist and/or is not very powerful? In the bible, it makes it very clear that humans are not as powerful nor as perfect as god. About non-humans, this is a reflection of the social times at that time when it was written: humans were considered much more important than other animals, so your wasp example is not really applicable because the bible is for humans not for other animals. Your wasp argument is then void.
I don't think it is void. Religious hymns and prayers (as well as other content) all teach that God made everything (another point, god made all the disgusting things too which (if religion is true) he should be blamed for) so God must have made that wasp as far as religion is concerned. Why would he create something (or another other thing or system including birth) which is imperfect? Is it because he didn't create it or because he's incompetent or what? Thus, I think that I have a point with my wasp thing. Besides, that's one of many little thing that questoin the ability, personality or very existance of God.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Donkey View Post
Perhaps the entire argument [the death penalty] can be summarised in just a sentence.

We kill people who kill people to show others that killing is wrong.

Last edited by Death; June 30th, 2009 at 01:34 PM.
Death is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 30th, 2009, 02:36 PM   #1023
INFERNO
Awesome Poster
 
INFERNO's Forum Picture
 
Join Date: December 27, 2008
Location: Canada
Gender: Male
Default Re: Religion

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
When I said 'science', I didn't mean it as in the theory of science makes the world work, I meant the scientific laws themselves. What makes a body work? Why are teh bodis able to move, eat, sleep and so on? It's the science (moreover, biology) that makes i all work. What makes a twig drop when you let go of it? Gravity which is a law based on physics. It's basically these things that all make the world work instead of simply being empty and inanimate.
Oh, I misunderstood you then. In that case, the world would not be able to function.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
If what you are saying is true, then as far as I'm concerned, stuff religion. No proof or logical explainations? Then I'll not listen.
Then that's being very narrow-minded and somewhat childish but do you as you wish.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
Making something true for yourself is only speculation. It doesn't mean that it's really true. Say that as far as I'm concerned, I'm invincible then I jump of a cliff, are you saying that I won't die becuase to myself, I cannot die?
It does not mean it is really true, you're correct on that but to the person, it is true regardless of what it is in reality and regardless of what the rest of the population thinks. If you think you're invincible, then you simply think you are. You may act like you are as well but to the rest of the population, you aren't. If you jump of a cliff then, well, we both know what the outcome is going to be.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
'The Bible' does exist, yes. Is the religion it teaches and enforces true? No. If you think it is, you are not athiest.
I do not think it is completely true. As far as I'm concerned, Jesus may have indeed been a real person at one point in time. I don't think he had magical powers and such but instead was a plain, ordinary human. I also know that the bible exists. Beyond those two things, I do not believe that the religion is true. I believe it can teach good morals but I do not practice the religion myself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
I know that there are theories, however, there are some facts that we know shch are defintely true and they are scientific and these theories are made from careful research instad of reckless imaginings and wild speculation which has come from nowhere.
Then enlighten me as to what these scientific facts are. By scientific, I assume you mean they adhere to the philosophy of science, otherwise I have trouble understanding why they would be considered scientific.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
True, it proves that they are devout however that can easily lead to narrow-mindedness and I hate that. I do not mind religious people and I don't argue with them, except here for obvious reasons.
You must hate yourself then as above you stated how you won't bother with any religions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
If somebody refuses to listen to my words of wisdom that I took more effort to get than they did for teirs for obvious reasons, so be it. Let them believe in whatever far-fetched and unproved stuff they wish.
So your words of wisdom are better because they took you longer to establish?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
Again, if someone refuses to look for the factual truth instead of just making something up, let them. Not here though since we are debating.
Well, so much for understanding other people's views... .

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
Well, that's dissapointed me since I seriously believed that you would do it. If you really won't though, then nor will I. I will argue about religion in my own way.
You can argue religion in your own way but just bare in mind, if you argue it with someone who is able to tell the difference between the philosophy of religion and philosophy of science, you're setting yourself up for a nice fall flat on your face. But it's your choice if you still wish to do so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
I want to be able to see things and conduct experiments that show they exist. You can;t d that with religion.
That is the problem though, you want to use scientific paradigms to something whose philosophy is the opposite of science. To put it in terms of science, it's like trying to test how strong a magnetic is using a piece of cabbage and nothing else. You may want to try to figure out how strong the magnet is but no matter what you do with the cabbage, it just is not going to work.

The part I'm slightly confused on is you acknowledge that it cannot be done with religion yet you still want to use it anyways. As you are dedicated to science, logic and common sense, then common sense will tell you that you need to use a different "thing" to use for religion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
Of course. In fact, I get the feeling that you're dodging my point.
You get that feeling because I was not sure if you were about to distort science.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
I don't think it is void. Religious hymns and prayers (as well as other content) all teach that God made everything (another point, god made all the disgusting things too which (if religion is true) he should be blamed for) so God must have made that wasp as far as religion is concerned. Why would he create something (or another other thing or system including birth) which is imperfect? Is it because he didn't create it or because he's incompetent or what? Thus, I think that I have a point with my wasp thing. Besides, that's one of many little thing that questoin the ability, personality or very existance of God.
You know damn well that the bible was written by humans, not by god. It was written at a time where the social norms, morals, laws, etc... were different than they were today. You don't have to be a believer in the religion to figure that much out.

However, if that reason is not enough then perhaps looking at what the bible says will show you why your argument is wrong. In the bible, it claims that nothing is equal to god (the Holy Trinity is removed from this for obvious reasons). If you are to say that the wasp is to be perfect, then it is to be equal to god. You see why your argument is not working? You're trying to use the bible to support something when the bible clearly does not support it in any way. It supports your argument up to the point of god making the wasp and that's where it ends.

"That is my ambition, to have killed more people, more helpless people, than any man or woman who has ever lived." - Jane Toppan

"There's a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, it's just a son of a bitch getting there" - Sully Erna of Godsmack
INFERNO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 30th, 2009, 03:36 PM   #1024
Death
Awesome Poster
 
Death's Forum Picture
 
Join Date: May 2, 2009
Location: Britain
Age: 23
Gender: Male
Default Re: Religion

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
Oh, I misunderstood you then. In that case, the world would not be able to function.
With this, I agree.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
Then that's being very narrow-minded and somewhat childish but do you as you wish.
To say what you did is narrow-minded too and thus, hypocritical. I mean really, why should I listen to any random crap from someone if they simply grab it out of thin air without any real study or research? See the problem here?

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
It does not mean it is really true, you're correct on that but to the person, it is true regardless of what it is in reality and regardless of what the rest of the population thinks. If you think you're invincible, then you simply think you are. You may act like you are as well but to the rest of the population, you aren't. If you jump of a cliff then, well, we both know what the outcome is going to be.
Precisely, that sucide-commiter will get what's coming to him, namely death. That proves that having blind faith does not make it true at all and so I therefore want more than just faith before I believe something.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
I do not think it is completely true. As far as I'm concerned, Jesus may have indeed been a real person at one point in time. I don't think he had magical powers and such but instead was a plain, ordinary human. I also know that the bible exists. Beyond those two things, I do not believe that the religion is true. I believe it can teach good morals but I do not practice the religion myself.
Jesus could well have been but yes, this magic stuff is nonsence, IMO. Some of them morals can be good but there are downright discrimintive and dangerous ones (mostly in the old testament) in them which I'm sure you're aware of.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
Then enlighten me as to what these scientific facts are. By scientific, I assume you mean they adhere to the philosophy of science, otherwise I have trouble understanding why they would be considered scientific.
Facts which have been acknowledged from research and experiments instead of just grabbing something out of the air are scientific enough to me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
You must hate yourself then as above you stated how you won't bother with any religions.
I don't hate myself since I tolerate religions, but I won't practice them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
So your words of wisdom are better because they took you longer to establish?
Not so much longer but I actually made effort to get it. I looked for the truth that can be backed up and make sense. Religious people on the other hand will choose their answers with little thought put in.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
Well, so much for understanding other people's views... .
INFERNO, I do not believe in their stuff so why sould I have to pay attention to it? You know full well that I should not have to believe it and thus it isn't really an issue on understanding. Do I hate people because of their religion? No. So I'm fine for that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
You can argue religion in your own way but just bare in mind, if you argue it with someone who is able to tell the difference between the philosophy of religion and philosophy of science, you're setting yourself up for a nice fall flat on your face. But it's your choice if you still wish to do so.
INFERNO, you are too predictable. I knew that you were going to say that! Why? You tell me. Regardless, you are not showing me any example in the way in which to argue so it justs seems a bit much to demand that I argue in said way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
The part I'm slightly confused on is you acknowledge that it cannot be done with religion yet you still want to use it anyways. As you are dedicated to science, logic and common sense, then common sense will tell you that you need to use a different "thing" to use for religion.
That's just an opinion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
You get that feeling because I was not sure if you were about to distort science.
I was basically getting you to think about the flaws in God's 'handywork'.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
You know damn well that the bible was written by humans, not by god. It was written at a time where the social norms, morals, laws, etc... were different than they were today. You don't have to be a believer in the religion to figure that much out.
I never even insinuated that God did write the bible. I don't know why you are using this as 'evidence' since it does not seem connected to the topic of which we are discussing. There are still contradictions between what you claim and what some religious texts say.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
However, if that reason is not enough then perhaps looking at what the bible says will show you why your argument is wrong. In the bible, it claims that nothing is equal to god (the Holy Trinity is removed from this for obvious reasons). If you are to say that the wasp is to be perfect, then it is to be equal to god. You see why your argument is not working? You're trying to use the bible to support something when the bible clearly does not support it in any way. It supports your argument up to the point of god making the wasp and that's where it ends.
INFERNO, the wasp does not have to be equal to God in order to not have silly little glitches. Besides, why must God fear creatures being as powerful as him or more so? If he can do anything, surely he can protect himself from anything that can harm him? Coming to think of it, he needn't give the creatures the ablity to even get to him in the first place. It's just interesting to look at all these little things. Besides, does it not seem more logical to say that it is an evolutionary or biological glitch in the system? If people wish to disregard this valid point, so be it. I have no prublem with them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Donkey View Post
Perhaps the entire argument [the death penalty] can be summarised in just a sentence.

We kill people who kill people to show others that killing is wrong.
Death is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 30th, 2009, 11:11 PM   #1025
INFERNO
Awesome Poster
 
INFERNO's Forum Picture
 
Join Date: December 27, 2008
Location: Canada
Gender: Male
Default Re: Religion

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
To say what you did is narrow-minded too and thus, hypocritical. I mean really, why should I listen to any random crap from someone if they simply grab it out of thin air without any real study or research? See the problem here?
How have I managed to be narrow-minded? Read your second sentence, there is the problem with your narrow-mindedness.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
Precisely, that sucide-commiter will get what's coming to him, namely death. That proves that having blind faith does not make it true at all and so I therefore want more than just faith before I believe something.
Well that's too bad because you cannot perform a scientific experiment to see if a god/goddess exists.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
Jesus could well have been but yes, this magic stuff is nonsence, IMO. Some of them morals can be good but there are downright discrimintive and dangerous ones (mostly in the old testament) in them which I'm sure you're aware of.
I'm well aware of the ones in the Old Testament being rather negative.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
Facts which have been acknowledged from research and experiments instead of just grabbing something out of the air are scientific enough to me.
Give me an example of one of these scientific facts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
I don't hate myself since I tolerate religions, but I won't practice them.
Refer back to a quote by you:

Quote:
as far as I'm concerned, stuff religion. No proof or logical explainations? Then I'll not listen.
Yep, you're definately tolerating religion all right, you said you don't even want to listen to them. Even if you don't believe in them, the least you could do is acknowledge them or listen to them but you don't do that. Face it, you're not tolerant of them at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
Not so much longer but I actually made effort to get it. I looked for the truth that can be backed up and make sense. Religious people on the other hand will choose their answers with little thought put in.
Religious people who abide by the religious paradigms would make their "words of wisdom" that for them is truth and for their paradigm, the evidence satisfies it. You're doing the exact same thing except you are taking a different paradigm.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
INFERNO, I do not believe in their stuff so why sould I have to pay attention to it? You know full well that I should not have to believe it and thus it isn't really an issue on understanding. Do I hate people because of their religion? No. So I'm fine for that.
I'm not saying you have to believe in it, however, just ignoring what they have to say on one particular subject (i.e. religion) then returning to them after they are off that topic is childish. It's essentially putting fingers in your ears and saying "la la la la, I'm not listening". Once they're off it, you then listen. So why should you pay attention? Out of respect, manners and perhaps you can learn something new. Society is greatly influenced by religion so why not give an ear for some of it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
INFERNO, you are too predictable. I knew that you were going to say that! Why? You tell me. Regardless, you are not showing me any example in the way in which to argue so it justs seems a bit much to demand that I argue in said way.
I have shown you how to argue it, I have given an example of it already. But I'll give another one: Johnny believes in Christianity and you two want to debate it. You can use your morals, his morals, both of your ethics and interpretations of the bible. You both would also abide by the religious paradigm.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
That's just an opinion.
Very nice tactic of ignoring it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
I was basically getting you to think about the flaws in God's 'handywork'.
Then make it clearer next time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
I never even insinuated that God did write the bible. I don't know why you are using this as 'evidence' since it does not seem connected to the topic of which we are discussing. There are still contradictions between what you claim and what some religious texts say.
It is very clear, humans wrote the bible, it is about humans, how much more clearer do you want it? I know you never insinuated God wrote the bible, I mentioned it anyways.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
INFERNO, the wasp does not have to be equal to God in order to not have silly little glitches. Besides, why must God fear creatures being as powerful as him or more so? If he can do anything, surely he can protect himself from anything that can harm him? Coming to think of it, he needn't give the creatures the ablity to even get to him in the first place. It's just interesting to look at all these little things. Besides, does it not seem more logical to say that it is an evolutionary or biological glitch in the system? If people wish to disregard this valid point, so be it. I have no prublem with them.
True, he could still overpower them, however, we're discussing Christianity at this present quote and so we are going to use what the Christian paradigm says. It is interesting indeed.

"That is my ambition, to have killed more people, more helpless people, than any man or woman who has ever lived." - Jane Toppan

"There's a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, it's just a son of a bitch getting there" - Sully Erna of Godsmack
INFERNO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 1st, 2009, 12:45 PM   #1026
Death
Awesome Poster
 
Death's Forum Picture
 
Join Date: May 2, 2009
Location: Britain
Age: 23
Gender: Male
Default Re: Religion

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
How have I managed to be narrow-minded? Read your second sentence, there is the problem with your narrow-mindedness.
Read your second sentecne. That is narrow-minded. I should not have to accept stuff that I do not believe, end of.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
Well that's too bad because you cannot perform a scientific experiment to see if a god/goddess exists.
So if someone believes that sun leaves filled with chlorophyll are pink, you can't argue against that? Nonsense; it's quite clearly green.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
I'm well aware of the ones in the Old Testament being rather negative.
Good, since that raises the question of whether or not Christians prcatice the content in the old testament. Christians are supposed to follow the morals from the bible and if they followed those ones, then they are bascially psychopathic terrorists. If they don't, they are not following all the ancient christian rules.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
Give me an example of one of these scientific facts.
I gave 2 already; the wasp one and the birth one. Alright, they don't truly disprove God, but they do question his power and/or existance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
Yep, you're definately tolerating religion all right, you said you don't even want to listen to them. Even if you don't believe in them, the least you could do is acknowledge them or listen to them but you don't do that. Face it, you're not tolerant of them at all.
Don't tell me that I don't tolerate religion since I'm the only person who knows whether or not I do and I bloody well do! When I say that I do not listen to them, I mean that I don't want to have to believe the nonsense coming out of their mouth. What right do you or they have to demand that I accept their views and either believe them or say that I believe them? I should have the right to believe that what they say is incorrect and tell them so. So don't tell me that I am intolerant of religion, okay.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
Religious people who abide by the religious paradigms would make their "words of wisdom" that for them is truth and for their paradigm, the evidence satisfies it. You're doing the exact same thing except you are taking a different paradigm.
I have already made it clear why their paradigm sucks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
I'm not saying you have to believe in it, however, just ignoring what they have to say on one particular subject (i.e. religion) then returning to them after they are off that topic is childish. It's essentially putting fingers in your ears and saying "la la la la, I'm not listening". Once they're off it, you then listen. So why should you pay attention? Out of respect, manners and perhaps you can learn something new. Society is greatly influenced by religion so why not give an ear for some of it?
INFERNO, I do pay attention but I don't believe in shit. Simple as that. We can argue this until the cows come home but you are not dissuading me from deciding against truly acknowledging what I believe to be false.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
I have shown you how to argue it, I have given an example of it already. But I'll give another one: Johnny believes in Christianity and you two want to debate it. You can use your morals, his morals, both of your ethics and interpretations of the bible. You both would also abide by the religious paradigm.
That is not a true example. All that is, is stating the way again. What I wanted you to do was to pretend that you were arguing for or against something and to construct one usng your lesser methods.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
Very nice tactic of ignoring it.
Nice hypocritism. Why am I saying this? Because you completely ignored my wasp and birth points in the same way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
Then make it clearer next time.
INFERNO, not being funny or anything but you are seeming to get rude. Why should I have to make that clear? Since you believe that people should always listen (and I don't disagree), you should have listened to it but no, you disregarded it so I should do the same, really.

You say that we should all listen to each other and accept our views. Then why do you insult me for trying to dispel religion in a debate? Why must you start pathetic arguments with me simply because I try to explain why not everything has to be connected with God and that there's other ways of viewing things? What do you want from me? While reading your posts, I almost get the sense that you are trying to convert me to Christianity in unusual wasy and yet you say that you're athiest so you can't be doing that. What are you trying to do then? Change my method of debate to suit your style? I do not want to. Besides, you haven't argued using your style yet. As for what I'm doing, all I'm doing is defending myself. What are you trying to do?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Donkey View Post
Perhaps the entire argument [the death penalty] can be summarised in just a sentence.

We kill people who kill people to show others that killing is wrong.
Death is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 1st, 2009, 04:10 PM   #1027
INFERNO
Awesome Poster
 
INFERNO's Forum Picture
 
Join Date: December 27, 2008
Location: Canada
Gender: Male
Default Re: Religion

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
Read your second sentecne. That is narrow-minded. I should not have to accept stuff that I do not believe, end of.
This narrow-minded game is going nowhere, so I'm dropping it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
So if someone believes that sun leaves filled with chlorophyll are pink, you can't argue against that? Nonsense; it's quite clearly green.
You sure can argue against it, however, it will be a faith vs. science argument.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
Good, since that raises the question of whether or not Christians prcatice the content in the old testament. Christians are supposed to follow the morals from the bible and if they followed those ones, then they are bascially psychopathic terrorists. If they don't, they are not following all the ancient christian rules.
This is all very true except you're forgetting one key word: interpretation. They do not have to take it literally nor do they have to take it metaphorically, they can do bits of both. So when the bible claims that someone should be killed for some sin, then it can be taken simply as they should be punished but not killed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
Don't tell me that I don't tolerate religion since I'm the only person who knows whether or not I do and I bloody well do! When I say that I do not listen to them, I mean that I don't want to have to believe the nonsense coming out of their mouth. What right do you or they have to demand that I accept their views and either believe them or say that I believe them? I should have the right to believe that what they say is incorrect and tell them so. So don't tell me that I am intolerant of religion, okay.
You have every right to believe or disbelieve in their beliefs, I have no problem with that. However, when you keep calling it nonsense and saying you don't want to listen to it, then to me, it seems you're intolerant of it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
I have already made it clear why their paradigm sucks.
Great way to be open-minded and tolerant... . You don't have to agree with their paradigm but saying it sucks, well that speaks for itself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
That is not a true example. All that is, is stating the way again. What I wanted you to do was to pretend that you were arguing for or against something and to construct one usng your lesser methods.
I gave the method and outlined it clear as day. I'm sure you do understand it and me giving you an example is accomplishing nothing for either of us.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
Nice hypocritism. Why am I saying this? Because you completely ignored my wasp and birth points in the same way.
Nope, I gave more than one reason for your wasp and birth arguments, I abided by the religious paradigm, I used evidence that satisfies it, and also included my opinion in it also. You on the other hand, used nothing other than saying that it was my opinion, no evidence, no argument against it, nothing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
INFERNO, not being funny or anything but you are seeming to get rude. Why should I have to make that clear? Since you believe that people should always listen (and I don't disagree), you should have listened to it but no, you disregarded it so I should do the same, really.
Because I was not entirely sure what you were getting at, I wanted it to be less ambiguous. I see no problem with asking for that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
You say that we should all listen to each other and accept our views. Then why do you insult me for trying to dispel religion in a debate? Why must you start pathetic arguments with me simply because I try to explain why not everything has to be connected with God and that there's other ways of viewing things? What do you want from me? While reading your posts, I almost get the sense that you are trying to convert me to Christianity in unusual wasy and yet you say that you're athiest so you can't be doing that. What are you trying to do then? Change my method of debate to suit your style? I do not want to. Besides, you haven't argued using your style yet. As for what I'm doing, all I'm doing is defending myself. What are you trying to do?
I've outlined the religious paradigm numerous times so if you don't understand it, then I can try to re-explain it. But you don't seem to misunderstand it from what I can tell so I have outlined it more than once.

I am not trying to convert you to any religion. I tried to show you that if you are to argue against religion, then it only fits to use a religious paradigm and not a science one. You eventually understood that, you gave some arguments against the religion (i.e. wasp and birth one), so I took the opposite stance because your argument was based on a false premise.

I'm not changing your style to suit mine, I'm trying to get you to see that if you are to argue against it using your ways, then you're distorting science and religion philosophies completely. Is it so offensive for me to outline this to you and then to suggest a better way that does not distort their philosophies?

I have not once told you to believe in god, vishnu, or whatever else. You were being rather narrow-minded from my point-of-view so I find it rather silly that you wanted to argue against religion yet you're so intolerant of it from my perspective that you probably weren't grasping the belief entirely and you weren't very willing to hear the other side (i.e. saying the religious paradigm sucks). If you're going to argue against something, then at least show some acknowledgment of the other side. You do show some acknowledgment but then you flop back to being so ignorant and intolerant towards it.

I don't have a large problem with you dispelling religion as long as you aren't distorting science (which is the paradigm you choose) and religion. When you distort it as you do, then you aren't dispelling religion, you're coming off as though you're dispelling your intelligence.

So, if trying to correct you is so offensive to you, then I'm sorry for that trait you have. Don't take it so personally as though I'm trying to change your beliefs.

"That is my ambition, to have killed more people, more helpless people, than any man or woman who has ever lived." - Jane Toppan

"There's a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, it's just a son of a bitch getting there" - Sully Erna of Godsmack
INFERNO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 2nd, 2009, 01:42 PM   #1028
Death
Awesome Poster
 
Death's Forum Picture
 
Join Date: May 2, 2009
Location: Britain
Age: 23
Gender: Male
Default Re: Religion

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
This narrow-minded game is going nowhere, so I'm dropping it.
Good idea.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
You sure can argue against it, however, it will be a faith vs. science argument.
In that, you are probraly correct. Of course, there is no question of the person't lack of perception or foolishness.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
This is all very true except you're forgetting one key word: interpretation. They do not have to take it literally nor do they have to take it metaphorically, they can do bits of both. So when the bible claims that someone should be killed for some sin, then it can be taken simply as they should be punished but not killed.
That is in fact a way of looking at it. That being the case, they are not psychopathic but they are discriminate however and thus stll (although not as much) evil.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
You have every right to believe or disbelieve in their beliefs, I have no problem with that. However, when you keep calling it nonsense and saying you don't want to listen to it, then to me, it seems you're intolerant of it.
But when I am speaking to them, I am not. Generally, I am not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
Great way to be open-minded and tolerant... . You don't have to agree with their paradigm but saying it sucks, well that speaks for itself.
Please don't be sarcastic; I take offense at that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
I gave the method and outlined it clear as day. I'm sure you do understand it and me giving you an example is accomplishing nothing for either of us.
Very well, don't bother. All you are doing by giving no argument is dissuading me from arguing like that in the first place which I thought that you wanted me to do.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
Nope, I gave more than one reason for your wasp and birth arguments, I abided by the religious paradigm, I used evidence that satisfies it, and also included my opinion in it also. You on the other hand, used nothing other than saying that it was my opinion, no evidence, no argument against it, nothing.
I still don't htink that you took full notice of it. You said that my argument was void. I practically said the same thing (and yes, what you said was simply opinion since I do not agree with it) only in a different way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
Because I was not entirely sure what you were getting at, I wanted it to be less ambiguous. I see no problem with asking for that.
True, but you could have said a bit more than asking if it's a fact. You could have taken a bit more notice and argued for or against it or both since you seem to like doing that dor whatever reason you have. I'm not really that bothered about it now though, to be honest.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post

I am not trying to convert you to any religion. I tried to show you that if you are to argue against religion, then it only fits to use a religious paradigm and not a science one. You eventually understood that, you gave some arguments against the religion (i.e. wasp and birth one), so I took the opposite stance because your argument was based on a false premise.
What you say about a 'false premise' is simply a belief. I am arguing against this so now, as far as you are concerned, you cannot just say it exists, full stop; you have to accept that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
I'm not changing your style to suit mine, I'm trying to get you to see that if you are to argue against it using your ways, then you're distorting science and religion philosophies completely. Is it so offensive for me to outline this to you and then to suggest a better way that does not distort their philosophies?
You are still trying to change my actions in some sort of way and this seems like a big thing to demand. I see no problem with the way I have been debating if you want my true opinion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
I have not once told you to believe in god, vishnu, or whatever else. You were being rather narrow-minded from my point-of-view so I find it rather silly that you wanted to argue against religion yet you're so intolerant of it from my perspective that you probably weren't grasping the belief entirely and you weren't very willing to hear the other side (i.e. saying the religious paradigm sucks). If you're going to argue against something, then at least show some acknowledgment of the other side. You do show some acknowledgment but then you flop back to being so ignorant and intolerant towards it.
About this narrow-mindedness thing, I would just drop the bloody thing if I were you since I think the same about you. However, I do not wish to keep going on about it though so I think that we should stop mentioning it. And yes, I do acknoweldge the other side but that does not mean that I should accept their views as the truth. If I do not want to believe in what they want me to, my choice - not yours or theirs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
I don't have a large problem with you dispelling religion as long as you aren't distorting science (which is the paradigm you choose) and religion. When you distort it as you do, then you aren't dispelling religion, you're coming off as though you're dispelling your intelligence.
When it comes to actually distorting science, I make good care that I don't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
So, if trying to correct you is so offensive to you, then I'm sorry for that trait you have. Don't take it so personally as though I'm trying to change your beliefs.
I'm basically saying that I am suprised by your sudden and uncalled for demands of me to change my ways when I don't even think that it is required. And please don't start insulting my traits. In fact, the insulting of the other (and yet you object to me insulting specific beliefs even though in reality, I have no problem with them - I'm referring to outside VT) has seemed to have started from your side.

Regardless, I do not wish to get into an argument about this. If you want a debate, then please keep it at that and I'll be fine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Donkey View Post
Perhaps the entire argument [the death penalty] can be summarised in just a sentence.

We kill people who kill people to show others that killing is wrong.
Death is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 2nd, 2009, 07:47 PM   #1029
INFERNO
Awesome Poster
 
INFERNO's Forum Picture
 
Join Date: December 27, 2008
Location: Canada
Gender: Male
Default Re: Religion

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
That is in fact a way of looking at it. That being the case, they are not psychopathic but they are discriminate however and thus stll (although not as much) evil.
Evil is a very subjective term and I have to ask, what is your definition of evil and of good?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
Very well, don't bother. All you are doing by giving no argument is dissuading me from arguing like that in the first place which I thought that you wanted me to do.
No argument? Well I'm no longer going to bother with re-stating it over and over because the end result usually is the same, you saying I haven't given it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
I still don't htink that you took full notice of it. You said that my argument was void. I practically said the same thing (and yes, what you said was simply opinion since I do not agree with it) only in a different way.
Yes, we both did say the same thing but the issue was I gave more than one reason whereas you did not. I gave an argument, you did not. Fair enough, we both gave our opinions but you didn't give any reasoning to it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
True, but you could have said a bit more than asking if it's a fact. You could have taken a bit more notice and argued for or against it or both since you seem to like doing that dor whatever reason you have. I'm not really that bothered about it now though, to be honest.
I wanted to know more specifically what you meant so I would know which way to argue and how. I'll admit, I may have not said it in a very polite way but nonetheless, all I did was essentially ask for you to elaborate on it. If I don't understand what someone is saying, then I'm not going to start arguing any sides right away.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
What you say about a 'false premise' is simply a belief. I am arguing against this so now, as far as you are concerned, you cannot just say it exists, full stop; you have to accept that.
It's a belief that has some implied evidence for, it's not simply a belief pulled out of thin air with no reasoning at all. You're right, I have to accept that although I don't have to acknowledge it is something I agree with and will abide by also.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
You are still trying to change my actions in some sort of way and this seems like a big thing to demand. I see no problem with the way I have been debating if you want my true opinion.
Well, go on then debating your way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
If I do not want to believe in what they want me to, my choice - not yours or theirs.
I completely agree with this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death View Post
In fact, the insulting of the other (and yet you object to me insulting specific beliefs even though in reality, I have no problem with them - I'm referring to outside VT) has seemed to have started from your side.
Explain how you think it has come from "my side".

"That is my ambition, to have killed more people, more helpless people, than any man or woman who has ever lived." - Jane Toppan

"There's a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, it's just a son of a bitch getting there" - Sully Erna of Godsmack
INFERNO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 2nd, 2009, 10:19 PM   #1030
ThUnDeR
Nice Poster
 
ThUnDeR's Forum Picture
 
Name: Matt
Join Date: January 4, 2009
Location: USA
Age: 23
Gender: Male
Default Re: Religion

okthis might be a bit confusing but this is my side of religeon...... i beleive in god for many reasons 1. how did everything apear like it did... the big bang theory is a bit of bull shit too me really ok we have to rocks slam into eachother and create a earth! with land and mountains and water and plants yea right.. next lets talk bout eveolution that is bull shit too.. ur telling me that i eveoved from a fish? yea okay.. and we also eveoved from monkeys? i dont think so. i have a question for everyone why dont we see anything evolving now like we never see anymore monkeys turn into humans . i no it takes millions of years but mankind has been here for a while so dont you think we would have seen somthin evolve by now??? and like how are all our organs working???? really oka right single cell organsm ... SYKEEE also think of all the people who have died and brought back too life. what did they say. they said they saw LIGHT! and even this one guy wrote a book bout it click here too seee the book okay so that is my main reason why i believe in god XD



Meteorology Undergrad, 2017

"The lord of the sad and lonely"
ThUnDeR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 2nd, 2009, 10:32 PM   #1031
Perseus
Legendary Member
 
Perseus's Forum Picture
 
Name: Jake
Join Date: November 15, 2008
Location: Terra incognita
Age: 23
Gender: Male
Blog Entries: 1
Default Re: Religion

Baker, humans did not evolve from monkies. Monkies and homo-sapiens evolved from a similar species. Humans evolved from homo-eructus, I believe, and monkies evolved from something else. Evolution takes time, single-celled to multicelled and etc(I find this hard to believe as well, but I don't know much about evolution, so that's why.)

Now to astronomy, my favorite. A planet is made from the debris of a star that had a super-nova. We can observe planets being made today. I forgot how water came to the Earth, so I'll try my hardest to remmember. Ok, so, we have this hot-newly formed planet that has volcanoes erupting and being pelted by meteors and possibly another planet. If I am correct, all the ash in the air is carbon-dioxide and shit, I forgot.

Well, the mountains is easy to explain, plate techtonics.
Everything is like it is because all the matter was stored in an egg before the Big Bang(this is the theory, well, one of them.) Once the egg-like thing just exploded all the matter was realeased and inflation spread all the matter over the universe faster than the speed of light. We know the universe is still expanding to this day.

And please, just because you don't believe something, don't call it bullshit. I don't like when people call the Bible bullshit because I am Christian and I know people who believe in evolution and such(such as I) do not like it being called bullshit.

Last edited by Perseus; July 2nd, 2009 at 11:13 PM. Reason: Grammatical errors
Perseus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 2nd, 2009, 11:02 PM   #1032
INFERNO
Awesome Poster
 
INFERNO's Forum Picture
 
Join Date: December 27, 2008
Location: Canada
Gender: Male
Default Re: Religion

The problem with this is your complete lack of understanding of evolution and I'm willing to bet also of science. But please, read up on the Big Bang Theory, the theory of evolution and the fundamentals of science as you demonstrate you don't have the faintest clue about any of them.

Although I must admire you intolerance and ignorance, calling things you don't even understand to be bullshit... . I wonder if you realize that medicine, which you may like is heavily based on physiology.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThUnDeR View Post
. how did everything apear like it did... the big bang theory is a bit of bull shit too me really ok we have to rocks slam into eachother and create a earth! with land and mountains and water and plants yea right..
That is not even close to what the Big Bang Theory states. The Big Bang Theory is based on the concept that the universe expanded and keeps expanding from a very small yet incredibly dense sphere of energy.

The idea you're proposing is not too difficult to understand: take two big rocks, slam'em together and some little bit is produced. Basic science tells you how mountains are formed but plants, animals, etc.. were not instantly made when Earth was formed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThUnDeR View Post
next lets talk bout eveolution that is bull shit too.. ur telling me that i eveoved from a fish? yea okay.. and we also eveoved from monkeys? i dont think so.
Before you begin discrediting it, please tell me your definition of the theory of evolution.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThUnDeR View Post
i have a question for everyone why dont we see anything evolving now like we never see anymore monkeys turn into humans . i no it takes millions of years but mankind has been here for a while so dont you think we would have seen somthin evolve by now???
We do see many things evolving in front of our eyes. I'll give you some examples: bacteria, drosophila melonogaster (fruit flies), etc... . Whenever you hear of an issue where some bacteria has become so resistant to medications we would normally have used, that my friend is an example of evolution.

Evolution is not a quick process and we have not as a human race been around for a very long time either.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThUnDeR View Post
and like how are all our organs working????
That's called physiology. I'm not going to explain how our organs work because a) it will take far too long, b) it will require delving into various "levels", from tissue level to organ level to microbiological/cellular level, and c) it goes into immense complexity that I have not learned fully even at 2nd year university yet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThUnDeR View Post
really oka right single cell organsm ...
This in its simplest form is actually pretty simple to understand. I'll give an analogy for this to make it very simple, take some play-doh, make little balls. Each ball is a single-celled organism. Slap'em together and it's multi-cellular. There are microbiological processes that allow the two cells to stick together.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThUnDeR View Post
SYKEEE also think of all the people who have died and brought back too life. what did they say. they said they saw LIGHT! and even this one guy wrote a book bout it click here too seee the book okay so that is my main reason why i believe in god XD
Wait..., so you believe that some person claimed to have died and claimed to have seen light in his death-like state and for that you believe in a certain religion?

So using your logic, you're telling me that if I write a nice fancy book where I say I've died, seen a bunch of trees because Lord Stinky of Smelly Trees and others say that happens, then you'll believe in Lord Stinky of Smelly Trees as a god. If you say otherwise, then you've contradicted your main reason for believing in god.

But I have to ask, how do you know the man wasn't lying? How do you know he wasn't a devoted believer who wanted to make some money?

"That is my ambition, to have killed more people, more helpless people, than any man or woman who has ever lived." - Jane Toppan

"There's a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, it's just a son of a bitch getting there" - Sully Erna of Godsmack
INFERNO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 2nd, 2009, 11:28 PM   #1033
ThUnDeR
Nice Poster
 
ThUnDeR's Forum Picture
 
Name: Matt
Join Date: January 4, 2009
Location: USA
Age: 23
Gender: Male
Default Re: Religion

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
But I have to ask, how do you know the man wasn't lying? How do you know he wasn't a devoted believer who wanted to make some money?
idk why he would lie like that and make such a good book and to ahve so much evidence like the hospital family ect.

w.e im just gonna stop talking now XD



Meteorology Undergrad, 2017

"The lord of the sad and lonely"
ThUnDeR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 3rd, 2009, 09:02 AM   #1034
sebbie
Nice Poster
 
sebbie's Forum Picture
 
Join Date: June 6, 2009
Location: UK
Age: 26
Gender: Male
Default Re: Religion

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThUnDeR View Post
idk why he would lie like that and make such a good book and to ahve so much evidence like the hospital family ect.

w.e im just gonna stop talking now XD
Science can also be used to answer what he saw when he had his near death experience. This is the when the body produces a chemical called DMT, which is a powerful halluncagenic, this could account for the visions he saw.

The problem with taking someone's word for the belief on religion due to what they saw in an experience that was personal to them is we do not know what happened, how they interpreted the events in the said experience and if they have been able to accurately describe it.

-Sebbie

FEEL FREE TO PM ME..
FEEL FREE TO GIVE ME POSITIVE REP TO!
sebbie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 3rd, 2009, 10:51 AM   #1035
INFERNO
Awesome Poster
 
INFERNO's Forum Picture
 
Join Date: December 27, 2008
Location: Canada
Gender: Male
Default Re: Religion

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThUnDeR View Post
idk why he would lie like that and make such a good book and to ahve so much evidence like the hospital family ect.

w.e im just gonna stop talking now XD
I think you somewhat answered your own question: he lies about it, makes a good book and gets some nice money.

The alternatives include him being on a hallucinogen of some sort, having a disorder causing hallucinations, being given certain medications by the doctors/nurses at the hospital, etc... . Having the hospital records are useful only to indicate his condition and any medications they may have given him. The family is only useful for similar reasons and to give evidence of his beliefs. However, neither of them can back up his story of what he claims to have seen. So the entire book is based on the assumption that he's not lying because you're going mostly by his word and nothing else.

If you're just going to believe in god mainly because of that guy's book then anytime anyone writes some fancy book and links it to a god/goddess, then according to you, you'd probably believe in it.

"That is my ambition, to have killed more people, more helpless people, than any man or woman who has ever lived." - Jane Toppan

"There's a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, it's just a son of a bitch getting there" - Sully Erna of Godsmack
INFERNO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 3rd, 2009, 12:35 PM   #1036
Death
Awesome Poster
 
Death's Forum Picture
 
Join Date: May 2, 2009
Location: Britain
Age: 23
Gender: Male
Default Re: Religion

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThUnDeR View Post
okthis might be a bit confusing but this is my side of religeon...... i beleive in god for many reasons 1. how did everything apear like it did... the big bang theory is a bit of bull shit too me really ok we have to rocks slam into eachother and create a earth! with land and mountains and water and plants yea right.. next lets talk bout eveolution that is bull shit too.. ur telling me that i eveoved from a fish? yea okay.. and we also eveoved from monkeys? i dont think so. i have a question for everyone why dont we see anything evolving now like we never see anymore monkeys turn into humans . i no it takes millions of years but mankind has been here for a while so dont you think we would have seen somthin evolve by now??? and like how are all our organs working???? really oka right single cell organsm ... SYKEEE also think of all the people who have died and brought back too life. what did they say. they said they saw LIGHT! and even this one guy wrote a book bout it click here too seee the book okay so that is my main reason why i believe in god XD
From what you have just said, it is obvious to me that you have absolutely no idea whatsoever of what you are arguing against. Therefore, how about you actually learn the concepts before you call them 'bullshit'? And humans probraly are evolving, it's just you are expecting things to happen to quickly. You seem to be saying that the 'fact' that everything just appeared is illogical. Well, let me tell you this, not only are you completely oblivious to the big bang theory (try reading about it here first), but you also are not considering this: How could some superior and unique being just suddenly appear and make everything with all but a few words in no more than a week? See the problem? And thus, you know damn well that your argument is no more logical as ours so you may want to revise that pathetic attitude of yours and stop effectively calling us 'bullshitters', okay!

Furthermore, one book written by a mentally unstable or (more likely) corrupt liar is by no means evidence so I have no idea why the hell you use it as such. Also, like INFERNO has said, do you even know the full concept of evolution? In the highly likely (near certain) event that you don't, click here. Next time, please actually put some thought into your arguments instead of rushing in and posting nonsense, thankyou.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INFERNO View Post
Evil is a very subjective term and I have to ask, what is your definition of evil and of good?
Evil: Pure, definite (and also pointless) evil is going out of your way to hurt others in any way. It could be anythng from simple bullying to murder. More subtle evil which is more like corruption than actual evil can be trying to benefit somehow but not caring how you do it. This can include selling a new brand of drink but putting an unkown drug in it (without people knowing) that makes the drinker become addicted without realisation and thus comes back to but more and more. This is doing something evil in order to benefit; corruption.

Good: Definite good comes from going out of your way and makng sacrifices to help others. Say, you had to choose (don't ask for an actual scenareo; just make one up in your mind) to either save the lives of several good people who you do not know at all or save a loved one, the good thing to do would be save the good people despite the fact that you don't know them and your will be extremely upset with the death of your loved one. More common but also good ways of being good is simply being kind and helpful in all the little ways like putting rubbish in the bin instead of throwing it on the ground, helping someone prepare a meal or complimenting people.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThUnDeR View Post
w.e im just gonna stop talking now XD
Why? Because you understand that we all have a point and you don't and so you do not wish to continue 'arguing'?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Donkey View Post
Perhaps the entire argument [the death penalty] can be summarised in just a sentence.

We kill people who kill people to show others that killing is wrong.

Last edited by Death; July 5th, 2009 at 11:34 AM.
Death is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 3rd, 2009, 12:49 PM   #1037
Death
Awesome Poster
 
Death's Forum Picture
 
Join Date: May 2, 2009
Location: Britain
Age: 23
Gender: Male
Default Re: Religion

By the way, I found this rather intersting video with Richard Dawkins that you may be interested in seeing:
Click here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Donkey View Post
Perhaps the entire argument [the death penalty] can be summarised in just a sentence.

We kill people who kill people to show others that killing is wrong.
Death is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 8th, 2009, 05:53 AM   #1038
JacobHerrington
Junior Member+
 
JacobHerrington's Forum Picture
 
Join Date: January 25, 2009
Location: lousiana
Age: 25
Gender: Male
Default Re: Religion

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/RNy6ziOyxoA&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/RNy6ziOyxoA&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

"If you can find a lover, you'll be happy.
If not, you become a philospher".
JacobHerrington is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 8th, 2009, 01:04 PM   #1039
Commander Thor
Awesome Poster
 
Commander Thor's Forum Picture
 
Name: Brandon
Join Date: May 9, 2008
Location: Upon My Chariot
Gender: Male
Default Re: Religion

Quote:
Originally Posted by JacobHerrington View Post
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/RNy6ziOyxoA&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/RNy6ziOyxoA&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
And I'll just fix that for ya.....

Good video BTW.

GovChat Operator
Commander Thor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 8th, 2009, 02:22 PM   #1040
Death
Awesome Poster
 
Death's Forum Picture
 
Join Date: May 2, 2009
Location: Britain
Age: 23
Gender: Male
Default Re: Religion

Wow, I could not stop laughing throughout that! He holds some very true and also obvious points although I must say that there is something in Richard Dawkins's debates that you just don't get in his. Either way, they are both correct and very insightful. Thanks for posting this!

Here's a video that I like:


Quote:
Originally Posted by Donkey View Post
Perhaps the entire argument [the death penalty] can be summarised in just a sentence.

We kill people who kill people to show others that killing is wrong.

Last edited by Death; July 8th, 2009 at 02:25 PM.
Death is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright©2000 - 2018
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 2004 - 2018, VirtualTeen.org