"because theres this werd piece of paper and it says so in there"

[Remora]

I'm not attacking Christianity- i'm doubting their sayings.
When i get given some leaflet about "how God can help you" and "God can revive loved ones because in the Bible he did it too, death is his archenemy, it also says so in the bible and he will provide a good afterlife because we also read it somewhere in this mass of paper."

Now tell me. Why the fuck is everything in the Bible right? This reasoning never fails to anno me and i just want to grab a Bible and hurl it at them if they say "because god sys so, it says in the bible that god said that."

You guys' opinion on this?

[Horatio Nelson]

Because it is what they believe.


It's just like saying everything in your school textbook is true, whether or not you believe is your choice.

[Remora]

Well, then why don't they say that? Why does it have to be either God or the Bible?

[Horatio Nelson]

I don't understand what you mean? Would you mind elaborating?

[Remora]

The christians i'd run into always say <belief> is the only truth because of the Bible or because of God saying so". When you ask why God or the Bible are true, they refer to the Bible or God, respectively.

[Horatio Nelson]

Because the bible is the source of Christianity. Forgive me, but I don't get what is wrong with that, and/or your problem with Christianity.

[Remora]

It annoys me that a big portion of them supports all their arguments with the Bible and think they are right in conversations with people of other religions or beliefs because that book is their book of whatever you must do (even though some do not live according to it), without letting the opposing party resist or give an answer either by their belief or scientifically "proven".

I live in the Netherlands and here we're usually like "i need to see it with my own damn eyes or it didn't happen" so like everyone is atheist, i'm sorry if i turned out a bit rude with any of these posts but i'm bad at being considerate :(

[Horatio Nelson]

So in other words you feel that religions don't have enough "proof" for you?

[Remora]

So in other words you feel that religions don't have enough "proof" for you?

In short, yes. I tried making a wall of text to make it seem less offensive :$

if "science, physics & biology" was a religion, i would follow it, because all of the things they stated could be verified and are verified by alot of close relatives :c

[Stronk Serb]

Because it is what they believe.


It's just like saying everything in your school textbook is true, whether or not you believe is your choice.

The school teaching material has to be examined to see if all the facts are correct. Mathematics are always correct and other natural sciences but history for examole could be biased. What is written in the Bible cannot be proven to be fact or fiction. I think it's fiction but some people think it's fact. Just because you believe in something doesn't mean that you can go around giving pamphlets without some backlash. Why don't they get preachers in public places staging a meeting like once a week instead of some people giving pamphlets.

[Remora]

I don't follow history. I don't live in the past and had the worst marks for history D:

[Miserabilia]

The god-bible reasoning is circular which can be infuriating.

[Bleid]

In short, yes. I tried making a wall of text to make it seem less offensive :$

if "science, physics & biology" was a religion, i would follow it, because all of the things they stated could be verified and are verified by alot of close relatives :c

Should keep in mind that the sciences do not actually state things to be the case. That's purely from the humans engaging in it (it's not actually the result of the science itself to state something is true).

The entire scientific method is based on disproving hypotheses.

When a hypothesis is stated, the scientific method is employed precisely to try and demonstrate that the hypothesis is false. That's the beginning and end of the scientific method.

The human beings come in with their biases and opinions afterwards and say, "Well, we couldn't prove it wrong so we can assume it's true."

Subtle distinction. Thus why science itself could never possibly be a religion. It doesn't state anything to be the case, it only demonstrates things not being the case.

[Living For Love]

Once again, people are trying to compare science and religion, two things that are opposite by nature. It's like trying to compare black and white, it's just like the extreme opposite. As someone else has already said, religion will never ever be proved using scientific and logical methods. You can't prove God's existence using laboratory experimentations and methods, it's just ridiculous.

if "science, physics & biology" was a religion, i would follow it, because all of the things they stated could be verified
I live in the Netherlands and here we're usually like "i need to see it with my own damn eyes or it didn't happen" so like everyone is atheist
These sentences show how hidebound certain people can be. If you need to see something in order to believe in it, and if you will only believe in something that can only be verified using "science", and if you keep clinging to those thoughts, then all this debate around religion and science is just useless. It seems to me you simply can't even idealise the concept of "faith", the concept of believing in something, not because you see it, but because you can feel it.

You don't see the wind, right? Air is invisible. Do you believe that the wind exists or not? It would be dumb not to believe in it, because you can feel its effects. You can feel the wind touching you skin, or blowing your hair, or making the renowned Dutch windmills work.

Do you see magnetic fields, for instance? Nope, but the truth is, when you approach a magnet to an iron nail, it instantly pulls it in its direction.

Now, have I ever seen God? No, I haven't, but I feel his presence in my life, and I feel that whatever I'm doing, he's watching me, and looking after me.

I don't need science to prove me anything, I don't need science to prove the existence of something I know that exists not because someone has told me, but because of my own faith. But, of course, you can't understand this, can you? It's not your fault, though, it's the way the system we live in is designed.

[Vlerchan]

You don't see the wind, right?
You can measure it.

Do you see magnetic fields, for instance?
Also measurable.

[CosmicNoodle]

Christians are often delusional and make vuage, none sensical arguments that fall down with the slightest push, brain washing by the church to believe thats whats true, and that it's impossible for it not to be. I hate the church.

[Lovelife090994]

Once again, people are trying to compare science and religion, two things that are opposite by nature. It's like trying to compare black and white, it's just like the extreme opposite. As someone else has already said, religion will never ever be proved using scientific and logical methods. You can't prove God's existence using laboratory experimentations and methods, it's just ridiculous.

These sentences show how hidebound certain people can be. If you need to see something in order to believe in it, and if you will only believe in something that can only be verified using "science", and if you keep clinging to those thoughts, then all this debate around religion and science is just useless. It seems to me you simply can't even idealise the concept of "faith", the concept of believing in something, not because you see it, but because you can feel it.

You don't see the wind, right? Air is invisible. Do you believe that the wind exists or not? It would be dumb not to believe in it, because you can feel its effects. You can feel the wind touching you skin, or blowing your hair, or making the renowned Dutch windmills work.
Do you see magnetic fields, for instance? Nope, but the truth is, when you approach a magnet to an iron nail, it instantly pulls it in its direction.

Now, have I ever seen God? No, I haven't, but I feel his presence in my life, and I feel that whatever I'm doing, he's watching me, and looking after me.

I don't need science to prove me anything, I don't need science to prove the existence of
something I know that exists not because someone has told me, but because of my own faith. But, of course, you can't understand this, can you? It's not your fault, though, it's the way the system we live in is designed.

Finally, someone phrased this perfectly.

[Living For Love]

You can measure it.


Also measurable.
That doesn't invalidate what I've said before, so I'm not quite understanding what you meant by that.

[Horatio Nelson]

Christians are often delusional and make vuage, none sensical arguments that fall down with the slightest push, brain washing by the church to believe thats whats true, and that it's impossible for it not to be. I hate the church.

That's must be how it seems from the outside looking in. In my experiences, it is really quite hard to find a true believer that actually lives out what the bible says. There are so many people that claim to be Christian but hardly even know the 10 commandments.

[Vlerchan]

That doesn't invalidate what I've said before, so I'm not quite understanding what you meant by that.
It's possible to verify the existence of magnetic fields and the wind. It's possible to produce empirical data in regards to them.

This is quite different to god.

[Living For Love]

It's possible to verify the existence of magnetic fields and the wind. It's possible to produce empirical data in regards to them.
You're missing the point once again.

I can verify the existence of magnetic fields because I can see its effects (a magnet pulling an iron nail), even though I can't see magnetic fields with my human eyes.

I can verify the existence of the wind because I can see its effects (windmills working), even though I can't see the wind with my human eyes.

I can verify the existence of God because I can see its effects (his presence and his blessings in my life), even though I can't see God with my human eyes.

The only difference you can point out here is, while in the first two you can verify it using laboratory work and scientific experimentations, in the latter, you can only verify it using your own faith, nothing else.

[CosmicNoodle]

That's must be how it seems from the outside looking in. In my experiences, it is really quite hard to find a true believer that actually lives out what the bible says. There are so many people that claim to be Christian but hardly even know the 10 commandments.

Exactly, that's one of the thongs that annoys me the most, you meet a Christian and start discussing something, and they say its because of god will, and I ask them where in the bible it says that and they don't know, you then question them further and they seem to know nothing about there religion, as if they just use it as an easy tag to enforce there prediguses

[Vlerchan]

The only difference you can point out here is, while in the first two you can verify it using laboratory work and scientific experimentations, in the latter, you can only verify it using your own faith, nothing else.
I see this as a very important distinction.

It's why I don't find wind and magnetism relevant comparisons to god.

[Miserabilia]

Once again, people are trying to compare science and religion, two things that are opposite by nature. It's like trying to compare black and white, it's just like the extreme opposite. As someone else has already said, religion will never ever be proved using scientific and logical methods. You can't prove God's existence using laboratory experimentations and methods, it's just ridiculous.



- how does one achieve "faith"?

- if religion can only and only, truly be understood by someone with "faith", how does anyone become religious? Do you just need to be lucky enough to gain this ability of "faith"?

- if not, and faith can be taught, how does one teach faith, this thing that is appearently the OPPOSITE of science and logic? How does one teach something without logic?

- how can religious expect to be taken even slightly serious by people who appearently do not own the basic skill to even remotely understand faith? According to you, someone without faith can NOT understand. Therefore there's no point in trying to take a beleif seriously for someone like me, because I couldn't understand anyway.





These sentences show how hidebound certain people can be. If you need to see something in order to believe in it, and if you will only believe in something that can only be verified using "science", and if you keep clinging to those thoughts, then all this debate around religion and science is just useless. It seems to me you simply can't even idealise the concept of "faith", the concept of believing in something, not because you see it, but because you can feel it.



Define "feel" here.
If you can "feel" it, there has to be something happening in your brain in order for you to be able to feel it, think about it, and be aware of it. This input in your brain either comes from the natural outside world, from within , or from god.
The first two are according to what we know the most likely thing to happen.
I mean, hate to bring up the crazy argument,
but there are people who have faith, who beleive, that they are dragons, doorknobs or teapots.
They can feel that they are those things.
Would you say, in that case, that those ideas simply come from within their brains,
or, that they just have "faith", that you do not have in that, and therefore you could never understand.
In the case of the latter, why would have no ability to say if anything is true or false when there's faith involved, because faith appearently makes anything special and true.

Could you show how a faith in your god should be taken more seirously than a faith in a greek god, and how that should be taken more seriously than faith that dragons exist, and that the illuminati is hiding them in cuba?
Or are all those things equally serious and true because there's faith involved?




You don't see the wind, right? Air is invisible. Do you believe that the wind exists or not? It would be dumb not to believe in it, because you can feel its effects. You can feel the wind touching you skin, or blowing your hair, or making the renowned Dutch windmills work.
Do you see magnetic fields, for instance? Nope, but the truth is, when you approach a magnet to an iron nail, it instantly pulls it in its direction.



There are all observations; we notice that we can feel the air. We find out we have nerves on our skin that allow us to feel air. Then, we can put of devices to measure the existence of our.

You know when I would doubt the existence of air? If I could not feel it, but about 30% of people do and do not have proof that it exist.
I would blame it on the people, and i would definetly not be convinced that a thing such as air actualy exist.

You example implies that "seeing' things is the most important to science. It's not. We don't see atoms and molecules and neutrons and protons and quarks, but we can see that their existence seems to be verified with measurements.





Now, have I ever seen God? No, I haven't, but I feel his presence in my life, and I feel that whatever I'm doing, he's watching me, and looking after me.

I don't need science to prove me anything, I don't need science to prove the existence of something I know that exists not because someone has told me, but because of my own faith. But, of course, you can't understand this, can you? It's not your fault, though, it's the way the system we live in is designed.

Can you measure god? Can you make other people that don't beleive in god feel god? You can't;
that's why the word "faith " becomes involved in arguments like this.
It's basicly a free pass to beleive anything wihtout reason and still request for it to be a valid and respected beleif.

Don't get me wrong; i respect your beleifs and other religious beleifs, simply because it's so embedded in them and to do otherwise would hurt them and be morally wrong.

[Living For Love]

- how does one achieve "faith"?
By something called "Evangelisation":
1. Hearing about the Bible.

- if religion can only and only, truly be understood by someone with "faith", how does anyone become religious? Do you just need to be lucky enough to gain this ability of "faith"?

When you hear about the Bible for the first time (the Old Testament, the patriarchs, the Gospel, Jesus, his life, his teachings, his death, etc), I'd say you're intelligent and mature enough to understand the way it "works" in its most simple way. Basically is this: there's a God who created everything we know, including mankind. Mankind decided to rebel against the Creator, and commits sins. God cannot communicate and interact with anyone that commits sin. Yet, because God loved mankind so much, he decides to sacrifice his Son, Jesus. After the sacrifice, mankind can, once again, interact with God (using praying).

I'm pretty sure anyone can understand this. It makes a certain logic. This is the main basis of Christianity. If you know this, then you're able to become religious.

Now, the problem is that people cannot perceive the idea of a God. An invisible person living in the skies!? No, no way, prove me that God exists, and then I'll believe in it. The thing is, I can't prove anyone that God exists, I can only know that he exists because of my own faith. If you don't share that faith, then you'll never believe in it. That faith must start in you, I can't force you to have a faith.

- if not, and faith can be taught, how does one teach faith, this thing that is appearently the OPPOSITE of science and logic? How does one teach something without logic?

No. Faith is not taught. You can't teach faith like someone teaches Biology or Maths at school. The only thing you can do is talk with other people and let them know about the Gospel and the Bible.

- how can religious expect to be taken even slightly serious by people who appearently do not own the basic skill to even remotely understand faith? According to you, someone without faith can NOT understand. Therefore there's no point in trying to take a beleif seriously for someone like me, because I couldn't understand anyway.

That's point number two:
2. The power of the Holy Ghost.

You already know how to become religious: knowing about the Bible. You only need to know the Bible's main principles in order to become religious. Now, in order to become a real Christian, a real Son of God, you'll need a much powerful tool that neither men or church leaders have at their disposal, which is the Holy Ghost. After you've heard about the Bible, and after all your doubts and questions about it are clarified, you're destiny in now in God's hands. He's the only one with the power to finally "open your eyes" and make you realise this: God exists, he's real, and he has a plan for me. And how does God do this? Through the Holy Ghost, which has the power to change your life forever. And now you may ask: "But how does a stupid idiotic "ghost" makes me realise whatever he wants?". Well, there's a proverb that says God writes straight with crooked lines. Basically, God allows things to happen and at first we don't understand why, but in the future we will, I'm sure of that. God can make many things happen in your life, and when you actually go through them, you understand.

I could tell you what my happened with me, personally. My parents always took me to church when I was little, and I obviously didn't understand anything about it. I only knew there was something called "God" that had a son that was born, lived, died, resurrected, lived for a bit more time and then went to the sky. I only had this perception. My parents, however, always taught me to pray, and they said: "Whenever you want something, you ask for it, and God gives it to you." And I said: "Oh fuck yeah, I want a gold-plated PS4, a Samsung Galaxy, a purple Lamborghini and a hot Latvian hooker in my bedroom right now." But, obviously, God is not some kind of lamp that you rub, make a wish, and there you go. God created men with the ability to work, to earn their living, to earn only what their entitled to. So I asked God good grades instead, and he gave them to me. Always. He never ever failed once, because I knew that, if I happened to have a bad grade at school, it was because I did something wrong that made God angry. So I asked for forgiveness afterwards, and he always accepted it. And then I thought: "Well, yeah, he must exist, because he actually answers to my prayers." That's how I feel it.

I can't explain it to you any better than this. I feel God in my life, I feel he's always watching after me. It's my faith that makes me tell you this, but since you don't have it, you can't understand. True Christians know what I'm talking about, though.

Because I'm feeling so generous, I made a crappy scheme on Paint just for you:

http://i.imgur.com/UxmZ2S6.png

Define "feel" here.
If you can "feel" it, there has to be something happening in your brain in order for you to be able to feel it, think about it, and be aware of it. This input in your brain either comes from the natural outside world, from within , or from god.
No, no, no, no, no, what the hell, no, no, simply no. If I can feel it there has to be something happening in my brain!? That's like saying God is a sensation like hot and cold. When I say feel, I'm not referring to feelings you percept using your senses, it's something much more complex than that. You feel it because of your faith, and your faith, it's not like a chemical reaction in your brain. when I say I feel, I'm referring to all the things God has done in my life that makes me say, without any doubt, that he exists. I can't show it to you because you don't share the same faith, but I have it, and it's because of my faith that I can understand that all the things that happen in my life are because of God, are because he's in control of everything that happens in my life.

The first two are according to what we know the most likely thing to happen.
I mean, hate to bring up the crazy argument,
but there are people who have faith, who beleive, that they are dragons, doorknobs or teapots.
They can feel that they are those things.
Would you say, in that case, that those ideas simply come from within their brains,
or, that they just have "faith", that you do not have in that, and therefore you could never understand.

I've been in a lot of debates about religion but that argument is simply something unique and outstanding. How can you have faith in being a teapot? I mean, if you are, you are, you don't need faith. But answering your question, in that case, I'd ask one of those people what concrete thing has the dragons and teapots done in their life to make them believe in such a thing.

In the case of the latter, why would have no ability to say if anything is true or false when there's faith involved, because faith appearently makes anything special and true.
Because it does, faith makes everything seem so clear. I can show you if something is true or false by proving it, but I can't prove to you that God exists because that assumption comes from my faith, a faith that you don't have. You have to own it and experience it first hand in order to understand.

Could you show how a faith in your god should be taken more seirously than a faith in a greek god, and how that should be taken more seriously than faith that dragons exist, and that the illuminati is hiding them in cuba?
Or are all those things equally serious and true because there's faith involved?
Oh, I'd never say that, I'd never say my faith is more serious or important that the faith a person who believes in a Greek god has. I'd just ask that person what their "god" has done for him/her.

There are all observations; we notice that we can feel the air. We find out we have nerves on our skin that allow us to feel air. Then, we can put of devices to measure the existence of our.

You know when I would doubt the existence of air? If I could not feel it, but about 30% of people do and do not have proof that it exist.
I would blame it on the people, and i would definetly not be convinced that a thing such as air actualy exist.
Ok, so you need to feel something, with your senses, in order to believe in it. Do you believe in evolution, then? Because there's no way you can feel it.

You example implies that "seeing' things is the most important to science. It's not. We don't see atoms and molecules and neutrons and protons and quarks, but we can see that their existence seems to be verified with measurements.
Just like God's existence is verified to me by the faith I have in him, then.

Can you measure god? Can you make other people that don't beleive in god feel god? You can't;
True.
that's why the word "faith " becomes involved in arguments like this.
It's basicly a free pass to beleive anything wihtout reason and still request for it to be a valid and respected beleif.

I'm not forcing anyone to believe in anything, believe whatever you want, I couldn't care less. I'm just telling you why I believe it and how it works for me.

[Miserabilia]

By something called "Evangelisation":
1. Hearing about the Bible.

When you hear about the Bible for the first time (the Old Testament, the patriarchs, the Gospel, Jesus, his life, his teachings, his death, etc), I'd say you're intelligent and mature enough to understand the way it "works" in its most simple way. Basically is this: there's a God who created everything we know, including mankind. Mankind decided to rebel against the Creator, and commits sins. God cannot communicate and interact with anyone that commits sin. Yet, because God loved mankind so much, he decides to sacrifice his Son, Jesus. After the sacrifice, mankind can, once again, interact with God (using praying).

I'm pretty sure anyone can understand this. It makes a certain logic. This is the main basis of Christianity. If you know this, then you're able to become religious.

Now, the problem is that people cannot perceive the idea of a God. An invisible person living in the skies!? No, no way, prove me that God exists, and then I'll believe in it. The thing is, I can't prove anyone that God exists, I can only know that he exists because of my own faith. If you don't share that faith, then you'll never believe in it. That faith must start in you, I can't force you to have a faith. [1]

No. Faith is not taught. You can't teach faith like someone teaches Biology or Maths at school. The only thing you can do is talk with other people and let them know about the Gospel and the Bible.[2]



That's point number two:
2. The power of the Holy Ghost.

You already know how to become religious: knowing about the Bible. You only need to know the Bible's main principles in order to become religious. Now, in order to become a real Christian, a real Son of God, you'll need a much powerful tool that neither men or church leaders have at their disposal, which is the Holy Ghost. After you've heard about the Bible, and after all your doubts and questions about it are clarified, you're destiny in now in God's hands. He's the only one with the power to finally "open your eyes" and make you realise this: God exists, he's real, and he has a plan for me. And how does God do this? Through the Holy Ghost, which has the power to change your life forever. And now you may ask: "But how does a stupid idiotic "ghost" makes me realise whatever he wants?". Well, there's a proverb that says God writes straight with crooked lines. Basically, God allows things to happen and at first we don't understand why, but in the future we will, I'm sure of that. God can make many things happen in your life, and when you actually go through them, you understand.

I could tell you what my happened with me, personally. My parents always took me to church when I was little, and I obviously didn't understand anything about it. I only knew there was something called "God" that had a son that was born, lived, died, resurrected, lived for a bit more time and then went to the sky. I only had this perception. My parents, however, always taught me to pray, and they said: "Whenever you want something, you ask for it, and God gives it to you." And I said: "Oh fuck yeah, I want a gold-plated PS4, a Samsung Galaxy, a purple Lamborghini and a hot Latvian hooker in my bedroom right now." But, obviously, God is not some kind of lamp that you rub, make a wish, and there you go. God created men with the ability to work, to earn their living, to earn only what their entitled to. So I asked God good grades instead, and he gave them to me. Always. He never ever failed once, because I knew that, if I happened to have a bad grade at school, it was because I did something wrong that made God angry. So I asked for forgiveness afterwards, and he always accepted it. And then I thought: "Well, yeah, he must exist, because he actually answers to my prayers." That's how I feel it.

I can't explain it to you any better than this. I feel God in my life, I feel he's always watching after me. It's my faith that makes me tell you this, but since you don't have it, you can't understand. True Christians know what I'm talking about, though.

Because I'm feeling so generous, I made a crappy scheme on Paint just for you:

image (http://i.imgur.com/UxmZ2S6.png)


[1]: All of this implies I must choose to have faith. Which means my faith comes form within me as an organism, from my brain. I can hear about faith, store it in my brain, and then acoording to you choose to activate it and understand everything about beleif and religion.
So, according to this, faith is a choice.

[2]: That's contradictory to itself and the rest of the post. If faith can't be taught, how am I ever supposed to choose it?
What part of me is supposed to have a motivation to start having faith?
For example, I don't beleive in god and have never seen a sign of him. What motivation do I have to have faith?
Because everyone starts off not beleiving and not knowing about god, like you said yourself, you didn't understand when you were young.
What motivation does a child, or an atheist like me have to activate this "faith"?
Since you are not able to teach it's motivations, (they don't make sense to me because I lack faith, right?), I can't become faithful.

It's a cycle, typical like the ones in a lot of belei systems. (You don't beleive it untill you beleive it).
It's essentialy a circular reasoning.



----



No, no, no, no, no, what the hell, no, no, simply no. If I can feel it there has to be something happening in my brain!? [1] That's like saying God is a sensation like hot and cold. When I say feel, I'm not referring to feelings you percept using your senses, it's something much more complex than that. You feel it because of your faith, and your faith, it's not like a chemical reaction in your brain. when I say I feel, I'm referring to all the things God has done in my life that makes me say, without any doubt, that he exists. I can't show it to you because you don't share the same faith, but I have it, and it's because of my faith that I can understand that all the things that happen in my life are because of God, are because he's in control of everything that happens in my life. [2]



[1]: Saying you can feel something without brain activity is pretty amazing and by definition testable. That's literaly something you could proof and you'd make big money.

[2]: the fact that you just typed all these words and had all these thoughts means there's something material or physical in your brain making you do that; if not, see [1].

-----



I've been in a lot of debates about religion but that argument is simply something unique and outstanding. How can you have faith in being a teapot? [1] I mean, if you are, you are, you don't need faith. But answering your question, in that case, I'd ask one of those people what concrete thing has the dragons and teapots done in their life to make them believe in such a thing. [2]



[1] :P
just an example.

[2]: Well, they could say every time they get lucky ,that it's their special teapot luck, or ancient chinese dragon charms. I don't know, somehting like that; it's irrelevant anyway;
I mean, what concrete things has god done in your life? Sure ther may be things you say are caused or stimulated by your god, but they are not concrete. That's the point of faith right? Something concrete would be measurable.








Because it does, faith makes everything seem so clear. I can show you if something is true or false by proving it, but I can't prove to you that God exists because that assumption comes from my faith, a faith that you don't have. You have to own it and experience it first hand in order to understand. [1]


Oh, I'd never say that, I'd never say my faith is more serious or important that the faith a person who believes in a Greek god has. I'd just ask that person what their "god" has done for him/her. [2]



[1]: Again the circular.

[2]: they could answer anything similar to what you'd answer, or the crazzeh teapot guy, essentialy. :P
Would all these answers be to be taken seriously in your opinion?

: Yall got anymore of that "faith" for me pls?



Ok, so you need to feel something, with your senses, in order to believe in it. Do you believe in evolution, then? Because there's no way you can feel it.



Well evolution is a described process, so yes I can feel it, by simple reading a text explaining to me what evolution is. Does that mean it's enough reason to beleive it? No, but evolution's evidence is another thing I can feel and sense. I can see the evidence presented for it.




I'm not forcing anyone to believe in anything, believe whatever you want, I couldn't care less. I'm just telling you why I believe it and how it works for me.

I understand , I know you wouldn't force a beleif or anything. Thanks for taking the time to write and post here :)

[Living For Love]

I apologise for the late response.

[1]: All of this implies I must choose to have faith. Which means my faith comes form within me as an organism, from my brain. I can hear about faith, store it in my brain, and then acoording to you choose to activate it and understand everything about beleif and religion.
So, according to this, faith is a choice.
You do have a brain, so you do choose whether to believe in God and his power or not, that's what faith essentially is.

[2]: That's contradictory to itself and the rest of the post. If faith can't be taught, how am I ever supposed to choose it?
What part of me is supposed to have a motivation to start having faith?
For example, I don't beleive in god and have never seen a sign of him. What motivation do I have to have faith?
Because everyone starts off not beleiving and not knowing about god, like you said yourself, you didn't understand when you were young.
What motivation does a child, or an atheist like me have to activate this "faith"?
Since you are not able to teach it's motivations, (they don't make sense to me because I lack faith, right?), I can't become faithful.

It's a cycle, typical like the ones in a lot of belei systems. (You don't beleive it untill you beleive it).
It's essentialy a circular reasoning.
When I said faith can't be taught, I meant that I can't teach you how to have faith or how to believe in God. I can only tell you about the Bible, the gospel, and he changed my life (as a testimony), but your faith must be created by yourself, through your free will in believing in God and through the power of the Holy Ghost.

[2]: the fact that you just typed all these words and had all these thoughts means there's something material or physical in your brain making you do that; if not, see [1].

No, just detach yourself from science for a moment and try to think outside its influence. You can't just justify everything that happens with us with brain activity, there are many emotions, for instance, that scientist haven't still explained how they happen in our brains, you can't expect to explain faith as a "brain function" or something.

[2]: Well, they could say every time they get lucky ,that it's their special teapot luck, or ancient chinese dragon charms. I don't know, somehting like that; it's irrelevant anyway;
I mean, what concrete things has god done in your life? Sure ther may be things you say are caused or stimulated by your god, but they are not concrete. That's the point of faith right? Something concrete would be measurable.
No, it's precisely the contrary. Faith, in its basic meaning, means believing in something you can see or experience. I don't need to see God in order to believe in him. I believe in him not because I have seen him, but because of the things he has done in my life, how he answers my prayers, and I feel his presence on my life, how he blesses me when I please him and how he punishes me when I disobey him, and all this comes through the faith I have on him, it's not luck, or coincidence, or destiny.

[2]: they could answer anything similar to what you'd answer, or the crazzeh teapot guy, essentialy. :P
Would all these answers be to be taken seriously in your opinion?

That's a good point. I would take them seriously, but I wouldn't think the reasons they would state were valid in my opinion. But, like me, they believe in their god, they believe that he did something in their life to believe in him, so I'd totally respect that, I just don't believe it.

Well evolution is a described process, so yes I can feel it, by simple reading a text explaining to me what evolution is. Does that mean it's enough reason to beleive it? No, but evolution's evidence is another thing I can feel and sense. I can see the evidence presented for it.
That doesn't make sense. In that case, you could believe in God by simply reading the Bible. Just like there are texts who explain evolution, there's the Bible which explains God's plan for humanity, his power, his influence and so on. There are many people who study the Bible as an historic document, yet they're not religious or Christians.

[Miserabilia]

I apologise for the late response.

You do have a brain, so you do choose whether to believe in God and his power or not, that's what faith essentially is.

When I said faith can't be taught, I meant that I can't teach you how to have faith or how to believe in God. I can only tell you about the Bible, the gospel, and he changed my life (as a testimony), but your faith must be created by yourself, through your free will in believing in God and through the power of the Holy Ghost.



So essentialy, the only way to make sense of a beleif is to have faith in it; that means that I must dive in blindly, and choose to have faith without reasoning, for then to have my eyes opened by it right?
So you basicly have to take a wild guess at it and then find out whether your choice was right or not.






No, just detach yourself from science for a moment and try to think outside its influence. You can't just justify everything that happens with us with brain activity, there are many emotions, for instance, that scientist haven't still explained how they happen in our brains, you can't expect to explain faith as a "brain function" or something.


What emotions are these exactly? If so, we're either
a; not sure yet
b; still studying

I highly doubt that there's any emotion which can not be explained wth brain activity, even if we haven't measured it directly yet.

There's no reason for me not to assume faith as a brain function untill you can show otherwise; and ofcourse you can't because faith is a part of the religion which can not be explained scientificly.

This shows that faith does not explain the logic behind a beleif in religion, it just switches it a step further; essentialy, it's used to put emphasis on the fact that the beleif is not rational and not based on logic; I'm not saying a religious beleif is bad or stupid or whatever, but essentialy,
the word faith is meaningless in most uses.



No, it's precisely the contrary. Faith, in its basic meaning, means believing in something you can see or experience. [1]I don't need to see God in order to believe in him. I believe in him not because I have seen him, but because of the things he has done in my life [2], how he answers my prayers [3], and I feel his presence on my life [4], how he blesses me when I please him and how he punishes me when I disobey him [5], and all this comes through the faith I have on him, it's not luck, or coincidence, or destiny.


[1]: Assuming you meant to write "can't" there instead of "can"??

[1,2,3,4,5,] literaly all of those things are experiencing seeing or otherwise observing/feeling which as far as we all know are things that exist within the human brain and body.



That's a good point. I would take them seriously, but I wouldn't think the reasons they would state were valid in my opinion. But, like me, they believe in their god, they believe that he did something in their life to believe in him, so I'd totally respect that, I just don't believe it.


That's excelent! That's where a lot of religious people seem to go wrong in their reasoning; as long as you don't place your beleif over any other beleif relying on faith (switch of irrationality) I can respect it.




That doesn't make sense. In that case, you could believe in God by simply reading the Bible. Just like there are texts who explain evolution, there's the Bible which explains God's plan for humanity, his power, his influence and so on. There are many people who study the Bible as an historic document, yet they're not religious or Christians.

I think you're misunderstanding me.
I'm not saying evolution can be prooven or shown by reading about it, but it's certainly a way to "sense" it. The moment we put up test to experience bacterial evolution, we measure it, and observe it; in that sense, "feel" it.

This example can apply to the bible that anyone can observe or feel god as shown in the bible by reading it.
So I aggree it's not a perfect example though.

[Living For Love]

So essentialy, the only way to make sense of a beleif is to have faith in it; that means that I must dive in blindly, and choose to have faith without reasoning, for then to have my eyes opened by it right?
So you basicly have to take a wild guess at it and then find out whether your choice was right or not.
Well, in this case, you'll always be right, so there's no space for errors. But it's not like you're going to dive in blindly, because you've heard about the Bible and the Gospel beforehand, so you already have what you need in order to believe, you just need the divine inspiration from the Holy Ghost.

What emotions are these exactly? If so, we're either
a; not sure yet
b; still studying

I highly doubt that there's any emotion which can not be explained wth brain activity, even if we haven't measured it directly yet.

There's no reason for me not to assume faith as a brain function untill you can show otherwise; and ofcourse you can't because faith is a part of the religion which can not be explained scientificly.

This shows that faith does not explain the logic behind a beleif in religion, it just switches it a step further; essentialy, it's used to put emphasis on the fact that the beleif is not rational and not based on logic; I'm not saying a religious beleif is bad or stupid or whatever, but essentialy,
the word faith is meaningless in most uses.
It may seem meaningless to you because you don't have it, or you don't need it right now. For instance, you can always fall in love with someone because you feel attracted to them, and that emotion can always be explained using brain functions. With faith it's a bit different, because you don't see God, and you don't really choose to have it, it's something that will happen to you once you've accepted the trustfulness of the Bible and once you're willing to know more about the God it talks about.

[1]: Assuming you meant to write "can't" there instead of "can"??
Yeah, obviously, sorry...

[1,2,3,4,5,] literaly all of those things are experiencing seeing or otherwise observing/feeling which as far as we all know are things that exist within the human brain and body.
Ok, that's a valid point. If something good happens to me, for instance, I can consider it a blessing of God, but now you can say: "Oh, well, it happened because it happened, it doesn't prove God's existence." For me, it does confirm God's existence, but the thing here is, while those things that happen are confirmed by seeing them or experiencing them, the faith that I have in God is not something that can be experienced by someone else other than me. All the things that God does in my life can be experienced and felt by other people, but the faith I have on him, not really.

I think you're misunderstanding me.
I'm not saying evolution can be prooven or shown by reading about it, but it's certainly a way to "sense" it. The moment we put up test to experience bacterial evolution, we measure it, and observe it; in that sense, "feel" it.

This example can apply to the bible that anyone can observe or feel god as shown in the bible by reading it.
So I aggree it's not a perfect example though.
But scientists didn't come up with the evolution theory just by reading Darwin's texts. I can always read books explaining evolution, yet I'll never believe them, just like you may not believe in what the Bible says even if you read it countless times, from the first page till the end.

[Mob Boss]

My opinion on Christianity, or religion in general, is I definitely don't subscribe to the shi... stuff. HOWEVER, i can appreciate that others have faith in something and a higher power or even afterlife to believe in. Is the bible 100% rational and reasonable? Hell no. But I don't know of a religion that is entirely pragmatic.

[Miserabilia]

It may seem meaningless to you because you don't have it, or you don't need it right now. For instance, you can always fall in love with someone because you feel attracted to them, and that emotion can always be explained using brain functions. With faith it's a bit different, because you don't see God, and you don't really choose to have it, it's something that will happen to you once you've accepted the trustfulness of the Bible and once you're willing to know more about the God it talks about. [1]


But scientists didn't come up with the evolution theory just by reading Darwin's texts. I can always read books explaining evolution, yet I'll never believe them, just like you may not believe in what the Bible says even if you read it countless times, from the first page till the end. [2]

1: Okay that makes sense. I was really just questioning your statement that there are unexplained emotions, and not refering to faith, but it works either way.

2: RIght that makes sense too. I understand your point.

[CosmicNoodle]

Simple, they are blind sheep who want someone else to think for them so they don't have to put stress on the two brain cells that they have. That's what religion is for, I though that was obvious

[Living For Love]

Simple, they are blind sheep who want someone else to think for them...
I don't know what makes you think believers want someone else to think for them.

...so they don't have to put stress on the two brain cells that they have. That's what religion is for, I though that was obvious
What a lovely way to phrase it, isn't it? So logical and rational, but I bet you can do better than this and come up with a more solid argument rather than cheap insults.

[CosmicNoodle]

I don't know what makes you think believers want someone else to think for them.


What a lovely way to phrase it, isn't it? So logical and rational, but I bet you can do better than this and come up with a more solid argument rather than cheap insults.

Yup, why form your own opinions on sensitive topics when you can siomdply use the ones found in this book, this amazing book that's not been updated to follow modern society in over 2000 years, I'm sure those opinions are still valid.

And admittedly, yes, that was a cheap shot, bellow the belt, but in my opinion, if you seriously believe what you read in that book, without even considering it wrong, you really can't bee too intelligent. But that's just the opinion of little old me.

And you're lecturing ME on logical and rational?!? Have your very read the Bible?! That's the most rational and logical book in existance! (Sarcastic beyond comprihention)

[Living For Love]

Yup, why form your own opinions on sensitive topics when you can siomdply use the ones found in this book, this amazing book that's not been updated to follow modern society in over 2000 years, I'm sure those opinions are still valid.
Well, that "amazing book" doesn't exist to serve humanity, it's precisely the contrary. And while the Bible doesn't tell you exactly how to act in every situation, it's through prayer and meditation that a true Christian can know the best decision to take in any situation. The Bible is an important book, but we don't pray to the Bible, we pray to God.

And admittedly, yes, that was a cheap shot, bellow the belt, but in my opinion, if you seriously believe what you read in that book, without even considering it wrong, you really can't bee too intelligent. But that's just the opinion of little old me.
Saying that I'm not intelligent because I believe in what the Bible says is as valid as saying you can't be too intelligent if you believe in texts written by Darwin 130 years ago without questioning it, or if you believe in universe's existence without questioning it, or if you believe that we live in a real world and not on some kind of gigantic eternal dream without questioning it, or if you believe in anything you believe without questioning it. What I'm trying to say is, my beliefs, whichever they are, are as valid as yours, whichever they are too, and you simply can't insult me or anyone else because of them.

But since that theory of yours is so ridiculous, let me just tell you that many of the world's greatest scientists and discoverers were religious people in some way, so you're not saying you're smarter than me, you're saying you're smarter than Einstein, Tesla, Galilei, Planck, Kepler, Descartes, Pascal, Newton, and many, many others, so please avoid having that arrogant attitude from now on, because it doesn't speak very highly of you.

And you're lecturing ME on logical and rational?!? Have your very read the Bible?! That's the most rational and logical book in existance! (Sarcastic beyond comprihention)
You don't have to expect the Bible to be logical and rational, that's something you would expect from a scientific article on Nature magazine, for instance. Once again, your mind it too primitively clung to science and its dogmas, that's why you can't see anything else on the Bible other than "texts with no logic and reason". You lack the faith I've explained in this thread.

[CosmicNoodle]

Well, that "amazing book" doesn't exist to serve humanity, it's precisely the contrary. And while the Bible doesn't tell you exactly how to act in every situation, it's through prayer and meditation that a true Christian can know the best decision to take in any situation. The Bible is an important book, but we don't pray to the Bible, we pray to God.

ahh, so good Christians decided the best course of action when meeting a homosexual is to generaly be an a whole to them? When meeting nonbelievers on the street to shout at them? To go to a good, dark stone building every Sunday to praised a god that is supposedly everywhere? Your right, Christians know what's best in every situation!

Saying that I'm not intelligent because I believe in what the Bible says is as valid as saying you can't be too intelligent if you believe in texts written by Darwin 130 years ago without questioning it,

Actually I did questions it, when I learnt it I looked at the evidence provided and deemed myself that the theory's given where the best ones we can cpnceve at the current time, and my understanding of science isn't set in stone, I acknowledge that it may be wrong, that the theory's may change. That's part of being onteligent, admiring your wrong whemnyou are, and I'm not saying your stupid, your actual
Y quote a nice intelligent young man, my wording must have been poor, and I apologise, I am dtselxic afterall, what I mean is that your critical thinking skills can't really be very evolved, you can't tell me that you blindly believe it all, and then claim to have good critical thinking.

or if you believe in universe's existence without questioning it,

Again, I did question it, I looked at the evidence and theory's provided.

or if you believe that we live in a real world and not on some kind of gigantic eternal dream without questioning it,

I have questioned that very concept, I dont believe we are.

or if you believe in anything you believe without questioning it. What I'm trying to say is, my beliefs, whichever they are, are as valid as yours, whichever they are too, and you simply can't insult me or anyone else because of them.

Can't I? I think I just did... You have the right to be offended at my views, you can rage and shout at me for them, but at the end of the day I have the right to speak them, learn to live with it, if I see a god botherer preaching, I shall input my view. And to me your views are not valid until you can provide evidence supporting g them, if you can, I will happily eat my own hat and convert to Christianity

But since that theory of yours is so ridiculous, let me just tell you that many of the world's greatest scientists and discoverers were religious people in some way,

Yes, they where, because whilst scientists, they didn't have the grasp of the universe we have today, and it was convention to be religious, it was very, very rare to be an atheist before sort of 1980(ish), you'll find that most modern day scientists, properly educated ones, are atheist, or at least agnostic.

so you're not saying you're smarter than me, you're saying you're smarter than Einstein, Tesla, Galilei, Planck, Kepler, Descartes, Pascal, Newton, and many, many others,

I didn't claiom that, compared to themnim a retard, tktaly inept co oared to them, they where intellectual goliaths, I'm a nothing compared to them.

so please avoid having that arrogant attitude from now on, because it doesn't speak very highly of you.


I will say however, a quote from a recent intelligence test taken (proper one, at a university, not a shitty online one) "Joe is superior, or borderline,in 3 of 4 areas tested", I am actually a very intelligent person, likely more so then you, or the man who wrote your fairytail, just saying. If you wish, I'm more than happy to provide photographic evidence of that.

You don't have to expect the Bible to be logical and rational, that's something you would expect from a scientific article on Nature magazine, for instance. Once again, your mind it too primitively clung to science and its dogmas, that's why you can't see anything else on the Bible other than "texts with no logic and reason". You lack the faith I've explained in this thread

Sooo...whilst science has to be logicaland rational, religion can be as wild and waky as you want? Ohh, I didn't k ow that, in this case I shall convert to the religion of KFC, I shall walk artpund with an empty KFC bucket on my head, and preach to the children of its greasy, chickeny goodness.


This is a creationist argument that always annoyed me. You act as if I " believe" in science, you don't believe in science, science is FACT, I don't believe an apple will fall if I drop it, I don't believe the sun gives off light, I don't believe that the human resperitory system is designed to oxegenate my blood, I don't believe those things, they are fact, science relies on measure, coherant, accurate evidence, something religion seems incapable of providing. Apart from 1 book, that isn't even proper evidence.

And isn't it funny how all these miracles suddenly stopped happening shortly before accurate records where started, how suddenly god decided to stop intervening with the earth just at the right time so we would have no accurate evidence, funny that isn't it?

I don't NEED faith, I have science, something MUCH more realistic and likely. And not saying it or I have all the answer, we havent even obtained 0.0000001% of all possible knowledge yet somehow, so far, it all points against a god.

And my mind is perminatly cling to science, well I'm sorry if I enjoy having evidence before I devote my life to something.



.

I'm really not trying to start a fight, but to be honest and respectful as possible, your views are absolutely ridiculous.

(Also, sorry for the late reply, takes a while to sift through all that trying to figure out what sort of sense your trying to make me see.)

[Vlerchan]

... your mind it too primitively clung to science and its dogmas ...
I take issue here.

Science is the antithesis to Dogmatism. It's based around constantly questioning the world around us.

From the position of a layperson who doesn't involve themselves in scientific community or its academia I can see how it might come across as "dogmatic", but that couldn't be further from the truth.

---

You also can't say Einstein for-sure believed in a god. By reduction he was either a pantheist or an agnostic.

---

I'm sure those opinions are still valid
I have no idea why you believe something being old makes it inherently irrelevant.

Especially when it has to do with philosophy.

... if you seriously believe what you read in that book, without even considering it wrong, you really can't bee too intelligent.
How so?

I can point to a tonne of unsubstantiated beliefs you probably have. Are you unintelligent too?

ahh, so good Christians decided the best course of action when meeting a homosexual is to generaly be an a whole to them?
You seem to have this strange idea that all Christians are out to get homosexuals.

In reality, in the first world, it's an increasingly dwindling minority.

When meeting nonbelievers on the street to shout at them?
Same as above. Except replace "homosexuals" with "nonbelievers".

To go to a good, dark stone building every Sunday to praised a god that is supposedly everywhere?
People do tend to prey to god outside of churches too.

I don't see why Christians choosing to worship together in specific places is such a big deal though.

That's part of being onteligent, admiring your wrong whemnyou are, and I'm not saying your stupid, your actual
Y quote a nice intelligent young man, my wording must have been poor, and I apologise, I am dtselxic afterall, what I mean is that your critical thinking skills can't really be very evolved, you can't tell me that you blindly believe it all, and then claim to have good critical thinking.
I hope you realise that when you hold a philosophical position, outside of agnosticism, you're "blindly following".

This includes atheism.

... science is FACT ...
No. That's not how science works. And this is why Dance In The Dark uses words like "dogmatism" to describe it.

we havent even obtained 0.0000001% of all possible knowledge yet somehow, so far, it all points against a god.
Please present this evidence. Thank you.

[CosmicNoodle]

I take issue here.

Science is the antithesis to Dogmatism. It's based around constantly questioning the world around us.

From the position of a layperson who doesn't involve themselves in scientific community or its academia I can see how it might come across as "dogmatic", but that couldn't be further from the truth.

---

You also can't say Einstein for-sure believed in a god. By reduction he was either a pantheist or an agnostic.

---


I have no idea why you believe something being old makes it inherently irrelevant.

Especially when it has to do with philosophy.


How so?

I can point to a tonne of unsubstantiated beliefs you probably have. Are you unintelligent too?

I tend to make a point not to believe things without actual evidence, like I said, TEND to, so I suppose yes, on some level I am unintelligent.

You seem to have this strange idea that all Christians are out to get homosexuals.

Ever one I've met,

In reality, in the first world, it's an increasingly dwindling minority.

Ahh, I was wondering when this would come up, thank you, I'm talking of actual Christians here, not the ones who cherry pick the parts they decided fit for modern day consumption. Thankfully your right, MOST Christians don't hate gays, but they are not the demographic I'm talking of here.


Same as above. Except replace "homosexuals" with "nonbelievers".

Fair enough. You win there, the street preachers are a minority, but an irritating one admittedly. (thankfully)

People do tend to prey to god outside of churches too.

I don't see why Christians choosing to worship together in specific places is such a big deal though.

Its not, its just another point that makes little to no sense too me. I don't understand the concept of lot, but thn again my psychiatrist did say I have trouble understanding social bonds, there is likely a social aspect I overlooked.


I hope you realise that when you hold a philosophical position, outside of agnosticism, you're "blindly following".

This includes atheism.

I don't blindly follow, I evaluated the evidence and decided I didn't believe in the possibility of a creator, I came to the conclusion before I even k EA what the word Athiesm meant, I had to google " What am I if I don't believe in god" before I even knew the word. I don't blindly follow anything, people doing that is one of my pet hates.

No. That's not how science works. And this is why Dance In The Dark uses words like "dogmatism" to describe it.

I'm talking of the parts of science we have proven to be true, but admittedly, that is a very small percentage of what we THINK we currently understand. And the point I'm trying, and apparently failing to make, is that science is built on fact, not on what we "believe" in, you don't "believe" in science, science is based on facts, you don't bpneed faith to "believe" in it.

Please present this evidence. Thank you

OK, you caught me, there, that figure was made up, its used as a method of conveying my point. But you have to agree with me that the human knowledge is tiny compared to what is out there, come on, we don't even understand whats at the bottom of the sea properly.

.

(Once again I apologise for my late reply, I have moved from my laptop to my phone, (Im on the bus to a friends, using 3G) I have no doubt this means there will be spelling mistakes, but on this platform I can't be bothered to go and correct them?

[Lovelife090994]

I was going to reply but seeing how most people here already place three strikes against me for being Christian, and have argued everything Dance in the Dark said which is my beliefs too, I'll just leave at this.

[Vlerchan]

I'm really tempted to create a "Christians versus The World" thread (esp. after reading some posts this morning), just because I can't understand your persecution complex at all.

I tend to make a point not to believe things without actual evidence, like I said, TEND to, so I suppose yes, on some level I am unintelligent.
Do you see how it's a ridiculous basis to claim someone is unintelligent though?

Ahh, I was wondering when this would come up, thank you, I'm talking of actual Christians here, not the ones who cherry pick the parts they decided fit for modern day consumption. Thankfully your right, MOST Christians don't hate gays, but they are not the demographic I'm talking of here.
So someone is only a TRUE Christian™ if they hate gays?

That's certainly an interesting perspective.

Its not, its just another point that makes little to no sense too me.
I think it's obvious that being around fellow enthusiasts allows you to learn and grow in your ideas.

And the social aspect too.

I don't blindly follow, I evaluated the evidence and decided I didn't believe in the possibility of a creator, I came to the conclusion before I even k EA what the word Athiesm meant, I had to google " What am I if I don't believe in god" before I even knew the word. I don't blindly follow anything, people doing that is one of my pet hates.
Would you mind producing the (presumably unequivocal) evidence that led you to accepting (not believing) that god doesn't exist? Thank you.

And the point I'm trying, and apparently failing to make, is that science is built on fact, not on what we "believe" in, you don't "believe" in science, science is based on facts, you don't bpneed faith to "believe" in it.
I agree here.

I feel I should add though that you can never be 100% sure that something is how it is. Our own bias' just lead us to that conclusion.

OK, you caught me, there, that figure was made up, its used as a method of conveying my point. But you have to agree with me that the human knowledge is tiny compared to what is out there, come on, we don't even understand whats at the bottom of the sea properly.
I meant I wanted you to produce the evidence that god doesn't exist.

[Living For Love]

ahh, so good Christians decided the best course of action when meeting a homosexual is to generaly be an a whole to them? When meeting nonbelievers on the street to shout at them? To go to a good, dark stone building every Sunday to praised a god that is supposedly everywhere? Your right, Christians know what's best in every situation!
I don't offend homosexuals and I don't offend non-believers on the street, and I highly doubt people who do that are true Christians, so I'd appreciate if you didn't generalise.

Actually I did questions it, when I learnt it I looked at the evidence provided and deemed myself that the theory's given where the best ones we can cpnceve at the current time,
Well, I did exactly the same thing, and I reached a different conclusion.

and my understanding of science isn't set in stone, I acknowledge that it may be wrong, that the theory's may change. That's part of being onteligent, admiring your wrong whemnyou are, and I'm not saying your stupid, your actual Y quote a nice intelligent young man, my wording must have been poor, and I apologise, I am dtselxic afterall, what I mean is that your critical thinking skills can't really be very evolved, you can't tell me that you blindly believe it all, and then claim to have good critical thinking.
The thing is, I don't blindly believe it all, I wasn't born a Christian. I have the evidence presented before me, that's why I believe in it, just like you have your evidence that evolution is a correct theory, for instance, I have evidence that God exists. The issue is, I can't prove you that God exists, just like you can't prove me that evolution has even happened.

Can't I? I think I just did... You have the right to be offended at my views, you can rage and shout at me for them, but at the end of the day I have the right to speak them, learn to live with it, if I see a god botherer preaching, I shall input my view. And to me your views are not valid until you can provide evidence supporting g them, if you can, I will happily eat my own hat and convert to Christianity
I'm not offended at your views, I couldn't care less about you, your views, your theories and your opinions, I was just saying you don't have the right to insult me because of my views, just like I don't have the right to do such a thing to you as well.

Yes, they where, because whilst scientists, they didn't have the grasp of the universe we have today, and it was convention to be religious, it was very, very rare to be an atheist before sort of 1980(ish), you'll find that most modern day scientists, properly educated ones, are atheist, or at least agnostic.
That's simply totally false, you have no idea what you're talking about. People started to free themselves of religion and the church on the XVIth century, during an intellectual movement called The Renaissance, which began in Italy (Google it if you want), not on the eighties like you claimed. And basically you're saying that all the scientist before that time weren't "properly educated", think about what you're saying before actually saying it.

I will say however, a quote from a recent intelligence test taken (proper one, at a university, not a shitty online one) "Joe is superior, or borderline,in 3 of 4 areas tested", I am actually a very intelligent person, likely more so then you, or the man who wrote your fairytail, just saying. If you wish, I'm more than happy to provide photographic evidence of that.
I'm not going to even comment on this, I'll just pretend you never wrote this.

Sooo...whilst science has to be logicaland rational, religion can be as wild and waky as you want? Ohh, I didn't k ow that, in this case I shall convert to the religion of KFC, I shall walk artpund with an empty KFC bucket on my head, and preach to the children of its greasy, chickeny goodness.
No, it's what it is presented on the Bible. If you consider what's presented on the Bible wild and wacky, then I could say the same about evolution, for instance: "Really!? That... that means I'm a goddamn MONKEY who sticks is finger up his arse and then licks it!? No freaking way!", but I don't want to extend the discussion to that point...

This is a creationist argument that always annoyed me. You act as if I " believe" in science, you don't believe in science, science is FACT, I don't believe an apple will fall if I drop it, I don't believe the sun gives off light, I don't believe that the human resperitory system is designed to oxegenate my blood, I don't believe those things, they are fact, science relies on measure, coherant, accurate evidence, something religion seems incapable of providing. Apart from 1 book, that isn't even proper evidence.
There are some things that are facts, right, and I've never claimed apples don't fall if I drop them, what you claimed was that my views were irrelevant because they were based in an old book. Newton found gravity in the XVIIth century, does it make it irrelevant as well? And while you can explain scientific discoveries with experiments, I can explain my views with my faith too, you're just not even willing to listen and even understand them.

And isn't it funny how all these miracles suddenly stopped happening shortly before accurate records where started, how suddenly god decided to stop intervening with the earth just at the right time so we would have no accurate evidence, funny that isn't it?
I'm not sure what you exactly mean by this, would you mind explaining, please?

I don't NEED faith, I have science, something MUCH more realistic and likely.
Good. You keep your science, I keep my religion, and you stop insulting me and my beliefs. Deal?

I take issue here.

Science is the antithesis to Dogmatism. It's based around constantly questioning the world around us.

From the position of a layperson who doesn't involve themselves in scientific community or its academia I can see how it might come across as "dogmatic", but that couldn't be further from the truth.
Evolutionism, for instance, is something that's basically considered an irrevocable truth for scientists nowadays, I'm pretty sure that any other theory that is capable of presenting evidence supporting that all living organisms were created another way will be looked upon with lots of disbelief and incredulity.

You also can't say Einstein for-sure believed in a god. By reduction he was either a pantheist or an agnostic.
All right then, it's just that I've read somewhere he was Jewish and believed in the Jewish God.

[Vlerchan]

Evolutionism, for instance, is something that's basically considered an irrevocable truth for scientists nowadays, I'm pretty sure that any other theory that is capable of presenting evidence supporting that all living organisms were created another way will be looked upon with lots of disbelief and incredulity.
If someone could present a theory opposing evolution with the same degree of evidence the evolution is currently supported with then I'd imagine they would not be met with such a reaction - I should add that this has never happened, and that's why people who oppose evolution are met with incredulity, (etc.).

It's 'virtually certain' that evolution correctly captures how all living organisms today came to be. I should add however that with evolution there's still a tonne of debate surrounding its processes and the complexities of its mechanisms - so people are constantly trying to disprove different elements of evolution and provide alternative explanations in regards to its workings: evolution as described today has come massively far since Darwin.

[CosmicNoodle]

I'm really tempted to create a "Christians versus The World" thread (esp. after reading some posts this morning), just because I can't understand your persecution complex at all.

Go ahead, it'd be interesting to see in my opinion.


Do you see how it's a ridiculous basis to claim someone is unintelligent though?

Yes I agree to an extent, but from my experience not many of the creatinosts I've met have been very intelligent, I will admit there are many very intelligent ones, but from my personal experience, the general IQ of a creationist is lower than average, them again, atheism has a LOT of morons as well. In the end no matter what you believe your demographic has a lot of idiots who will eventually shout louder than you.

So someone is only a TRUE Christian™ if they hate gays?

That's certainly an interesting perspective.

well yes, as far as I'm concerned, there are barely and Christians left, all that's left is Psuedo Christians, ones who cherry pick the bits they dem for for society and the bits that won't get them thrown in jail. Of they where real Christians then they would follow the bible to the letter, after all its gods word, not doing f as it says is going against god, and they'll burn. See what I'm getting at? Most chrositans these days cherry pick, like saying you breath air but don't want anything to do with Nitrogen.

I think it's obvious that being around fellow enthusiasts allows you to learn and grow in your ideas.

And the social aspect too.

As mentioned before, I have issues that limit my understanding of social stuff, I admit I mist have missed this aspect, now I understand better. And it wasn't very obvious to me, than you for explaining. (I have no experience of doing something with other enthusiasts, I am very much a stereotypical loner, I don't see the point of doing wpthongs with others, for the most part)

Would you mind producing the (presumably unequivocal) evidence that led you to accepting (not believing) that god doesn't exist? Thank you.

Of course, but it may take a while. And its obviously not unequivocal, making a presumption like that would be stupid.

Simply? I don't see how its possible, a magic man who lives in the sky, granting wishes and the sort. I used to be Christian, because it is what I was taught as a child, and I blindly followed, (this was before I developed any sort of mind of my own I'm ashamed to say) after all, why would they lie? But as time went on, I failed to witness any of the beauty that was described in the bible, failed to actually feel the presence of a god, failed to see any indication of miracles happening. Basically, the things I was told, and believed, I saw no evidence for, the same way one stops believing in santa at a certain age. See? I just failed to keep the believe going, and no we that I am old enough to have my own mind, and apply critical analysis to the claims of others and the world around me, I still see no evidence for a god. Do you?

I agree here.

I feel I should add though that you can never be 100% sure that something is how it is. Our own bias' just lead us to that conclusion.

I agree with you here, I'm not saying there is no god, because I can't prove it, and to say I did would be insanity, or a scientific breakthrough, and I have nether. For all I know, there may be a god, but I don't think there is. And am not willing to entertain the idea of one.

I meant I wanted you to produce the evidence that god doesn't exist.

same thing as I have just said.



(I have arrived at my friends house and am using his laptop, I am now able to answer you properly)

If someone could present a theory opposing evolution with the same degree of evidence the evolution is currently supported with then I'd imagine they would not be met with such a reaction - I should add that this has never happened, and that's why people who oppose evolution are met with incredulity, (etc.).

It's 'virtually certain' that evolution correctly captures how all living organisms today came to be. I should add however that with evolution there's still a tonne of debate surrounding its processes and the complexities of its mechanisms - so people are constantly trying to disprove different elements of evolution and provide alternative explanations in regards to its workings: evolution as described today has come massively far since Darwin.

I would like to agree with you here's also, if evidence as such was provided, it would be met with an amazing reaction, out understanind of nature as we know it would change.

----------------------------------------------------

I don't offend homosexuals and I don't offend non-believers on the street, and I highly doubt people who do that are true Christians, so I'd appreciate if you didn't generalise.

OK, my bad, sorry for generalising, but you have to admit, its far from rare

Well, I did exactly the same thing, and I reached a different conclusion.

I honestly don't see how you did the same thing and reached the conclusion of a god, I really don't. Difference of opinion I suppose.

The thing is, I don't blindly believe it all, I wasn't born a Christian. I have the evidence presented before me, that's why I believe in it, just like you have your evidence that evolution is a correct theory, for instance, I have evidence that God exists. The issue is, I can't prove you that God exists, just like you can't prove me that evolution has even happened.

But I have evidence for my theory at least, you have none, how did you even come to the conclusion? O really don't understand...


I'm not offended at your views, I couldn't care less about you, your views, your theories and your opinions, I was just saying you don't have the right to insult me because of my views, just like I don't have the right to do such a thing to you as well.

I really don't mean to insult, it may seem like it, but I don't.

That's simply totally false, you have no idea what you're talking about. People started to free themselves of religion and the church on the XVIth century, during an intellectual movement called The Renaissance, which began in Italy (Google it if you want), not on the eighties like you claimed. And basically you're saying that all the scientist before that time weren't "properly educated", think about what you're saying before actually saying it.

Yes, true, but it was VERY rare, for a LONG time, understand the point I'm trying to make?

I'm not going to even comment on this, I'll just pretend you never wrote this.


No, it's what it is presented on the Bible. If you consider what's presented on the Bible wild and wacky, then I could say the same about evolution, for instance: "Really!? That... that means I'm a goddamn MONKEY who sticks is finger up his arse and then licks it!? No freaking way!", but I don't want to extend the discussion to that point...

So a sky god who piped thongs into existence at his will males more sense than creatures adapting to there environment...OK...whatever you say. *Slowly backs away*
And fair enough, we shall not peruse that argument further.

There are some things that are facts, right, and I've never claimed apples don't fall if I drop them, what you claimed was that my views were irrelevant because they were based in an old book. Newton found gravity in the XVIIth century, does it make it irrelevant as well? And while you can explain scientific discoveries with experiments, I can explain my views with my faith too, you're just not even willing to listen and even understand them.

I did listen, I used to be a Christian, the only thongs that changed was that I looked and evaluated, and apparently came up with a different answer to you.

I'm not sure what you exactly mean by this, would you mind explaining, please?

There are no accurate records going back that far, accurate records didn't start til many years after the arrival and sudden disaperance of miracles as we know them, it just seem suspicious to me that the story's stop as soon as people start writing down events.


Good. You keep your science, I keep my religion, and you stop insulting me and my beliefs. Deal?

Deal, and I'm not trying to insult you, your taking my opinions very personally.

Evolutionism, for instance, is something that's basically considered an irrevocable truth for scientists nowadays, I'm pretty sure that any other theory that is capable of presenting evidence supporting that all living organisms were created another way will be looked upon with lots of disbelief and incredulity.


All right then, it's just that I've read somewhere he was Jewish and believed in the Jewish God.

What does that have to do with it?




Double post I know, sue me.

[Vlerchan]

Yes I agree to an extent, but from my experience not many of the creatinosts I've met have been very intelligent, I will admit there are many very intelligent ones, but from my personal experience, the general IQ of a creationist is lower than average, them again, atheism has a LOT of morons as well. In the end no matter what you believe your demographic has a lot of idiots who will eventually shout louder than you.
You're shifting the goalposts.

Lots of Christians, people who believe the bible, aren't Creationists.

This is because lots of Christians view large parts of the bible as metaphors. I don't see a problem in this.

well yes, as far as I'm concerned, there are barely and Christians left, all that's left is Psuedo Christians, ones who cherry pick the bits they dem for for society and the bits that won't get them thrown in jail. Of they where real Christians then they would follow the bible to the letter, after all its gods word, not doing f as it says is going against god, and they'll burn. See what I'm getting at? Most chrositans these days cherry pick, like saying you breath air but don't want anything to do with Nitrogen.
I don't see why you believe "interpreting as metaphor" as "cherrypicking". It seems they're accepting the same bible, just interpreting it differently.

It's notable that large parts of the Old Testement are also supposed to be ignored by Christians. Dance In The Dark could probably go into detail on this.

Of course, but it may take a while. And its obviously not unequivocal, making a presumption like that would be stupid.
Right. So you would agree that you're just "believing" like Christians, except under the separate belief that world affairs support your viewpoint better?

Simply? I don't see how its possible, a magic man who lives in the sky, granting wishes and the sort. I used to be Christian, because it is what I was taught as a child, and I blindly followed, (this was before I developed any sort of mind of my own I'm ashamed to say) after all, why would they lie? But as time went on, I failed to witness any of the beauty that was described in the bible, failed to actually feel the presence of a god, failed to see any indication of miracles happening. Basically, the things I was told, and believed, I saw no evidence for, the same way one stops believing in santa at a certain age. See? I just failed to keep the believe going, and no we that I am old enough to have my own mind, and apply critical analysis to the claims of others and the world around me, I still see no evidence for a god.
In other words, you have no evidence that god doesn't exist.

You're probably correct not to believe he exists though. I also see "not believing god exists" and "believing god doesn't exist" as to distinct things for reference.

I'm not saying there is no god, because I can't prove it, and to say I did would be insanity, or a scientific breakthrough, and I have nether. For all I know, there may be a god, but I don't think there is.
I should point out that this is the point I'm trying to make.

We can't be sure that god exists or doesn't exist or whatever. From that I don't think it's fair to attack Christians over their beliefs. It makes as much sense to believe that god exists as to believe that god doesn't exist. It's only when Christians want to start imposing parts of their morality on us through law that I take an issue with Christianity (and every other religion).

---

Until that happens, scientists will continue to back up evolution no matter what.
Is that a problem?

I can also say that, as a Christian, I do believe in a Post-Creationism Evolution, this is, I believe that God created all living creatures, and from that moment onwards, evolution has been happening, creatures have been developing and evolving like modern evolutionism claims.
Well, this doesn't actually contradict anything evolution claims, because evolution doesn't deal with abiogenesis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis)

[JamesSuperBoy]

Mostly you are as free to believe, doubt or question.

[CosmicNoodle]

You're shifting the goalposts.

Lots of Christians, people who believe the bible, aren't Creationists.

This is because lots of Christians view large parts of the bible as metaphors. I don't see a problem in this.

If a god was creating a book for people who lived thousands of years ago, who had no education, and who definitely had low IQ's, why would he write it all in metaphors? That's like asking to be missinterptited


I don't see why you believe "interpreting as metaphor" as "cherrypicking". It seems they're accepting the same bible, just interpreting it differently.

It's notable that large parts of the Old Testement are also supposed to be ignored by Christians. Dance In The Dark could probably go into detail on this.

I'm sure he could, and I'd argue all night, because the fact that parts are to be ignore and of disproves his own religion, if god is all knowing, then why did he sidenly change his mind and say " urrrm...all that stuff I said before, ye, forget that, here's a new book", indicating it wasn't an all powerful being, but that it was the work of a cave dwelling g man who back oedeled what his religion said as society and opinions changed.

Right. So you would agree that you're just "believing" like Christians, except under the separate belief that world affairs support your viewpoint better?

No, I don't "Believe", how can I believe in a concept that provided the lack of something to believe in?

In other words, you have no evidence that god doesn't exist.

Of course I don't, I never said I did, that's just my opinion, where did you get that from?

You're probably correct not to believe he exists though. I also see "not believing god exists" and "believing god doesn't exist" as to distinct things for reference.


I should point out that this is the point I'm trying to make.

We can't be sure that god exists or doesn't exist or whatever. From that I don't think it's fair to attack Christians over their beliefs. It makes as much sense to believe that god exists as to believe that god doesn't exist. It's only when Christians want to start imposing parts of their morality on us through law that I take an issue with Christianity (and every other religion).

Fair enough, but I'm really not attacking them, that's what both you and Dancing In The Dark need to understands, it started as a passing comment, my opinion, as asked for by the thread creator, and then he got angry at m!e, and so did you, that's my opinion n the matter, IG anything your both attacking me for my opinion here.



........

[Vlerchan]

If a god was creating a book for people who lived thousands of years ago, who had no education, and who definitely had low IQ's, why would he write it all in metaphors? That's like asking to be missinterptited.
God just inspired the people who wrote the bible. He never wrote it himself.

It's important to note though that all the important bits about ow to actually live your life are straightforward.

I'm sure he could, and I'd argue all night, because the fact that parts are to be ignore and of disproves his own religion, if god is all knowing, then why did he sidenly change his mind and say " urrrm...all that stuff I said before, ye, forget that, here's a new book", indicating it wasn't an all powerful being, but that it was the work of a cave dwelling g man who back oedeled what his religion said as society and opinions changed.
I have no idea. You'd have to ask god himself.

I'd imagine most arguments you'd get from this usually are going to be faith-based. I won't bother you with them.

No, I don't "Believe", how can I believe in a concept that provided the lack of something to believe in?
I would see claiming you don't see it possible that god exists as analogous to a belief.

How do you normally describe your position on the topic?

Of course I don't, I never said I did, that's just my opinion, where did you get that from?
You're actually right here. I just presumed from the veracity of your posts you were going to be one of those "Hard" Atheists.

Fair enough, but I'm really not attacking them, that's what both you and Dancing In The Dark need to understands, it started as a passing comment, my opinion, as asked for by the thread creator, and then he got angry at m!e, and so did you, that's my opinion n the matter, IG anything your both attacking me for my opinion here.
I'm not angry. I don't think Dance In The Dark is either. Neither of us really do "angry" here.

I commented because I thought you were being too hard on Christians. And your criticisms weren't great either.

[Living For Love]

Is that a problem?
Not for me.

Well, this doesn't actually contradict anything evolution claims, because evolution doesn't deal with abiogenesis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis)
It claims that humans evolved from primates, for instance, something in which I don't believe.

[Vlerchan]

It claims that humans evolved from primates, for instance, something in which I don't believe.
Right. I'd question your beliefs on the issue further but it'd be getting off-topic.

Maybe it'll come up in another thread or something another day.

[CosmicNoodle]

Until that happens, scientists will continue to back up evolution no matter what. And a theory like that doesn't appear from one day to another, it takes a lot of years, even decades, to develop a credible scientific theory.

I can also say that, as a Christian, I do believe in a Post-Creationism Evolution, this is, I believe that God created all living creatures, and from that moment onwards, evolution has been happening, creatures have been developing and evolving like modern evolutionism claims.

I don't really see how it could have happened any other way, but I'm hpfar from a scientist. And it really is a shame that many brilliant theory's Arte swept away because they contradict the flow of things

Yes, something you probably should learn how to respect.

I do respect your views, if you want to worship a sky god, go ahead

I probably don't have physical evidence like you, I only have the certainty that my faith offers me, even though that's enough for me, and I'm not trying to prove you anything.

I don't expect you to prove me anything with your lack of evidence

That still doesn't back up the point you were trying to make.


Ok, then, stay with that "different answer" of yours.

Tell me what you want me to say? We both looked at the evidence, and we both got different answers in the end. You seem angry because that's the answer I gave, what other answer is there?

What accurate records are you talking about?

Apart from the hundreds of years of records made by ancient scholars, your right, what am I talking about?




.......



I'm not angry. I don't think Dance In The Dark is either. Neither of us really do "angry" here.

I commented because I thought you were being too hard on Christians. And your criticisms weren't great either.


You may not, but he apparently does. :) And no, admittedly I may have been harsh with my criticisms, but you have no ides how and why I dislike the Christian religion, a topic I'd rather not go into.

[Living For Love]

I don't expect you to prove me anything with your lack of evidence
Oh, you wouldn't understand, either way.

Tell me what you want me to say? We both looked at the evidence, and we both got different answers in the end. You seem angry because that's the answer I gave, what other answer is there?
I'm not angry at you, I've already told you, I don't care about your views, I just want you to respect mine.

Apart from the hundreds of years of records made by ancient scholars, your right, what am I talking about?
Well, if you're talking about the miracles written on the Bible, they were true (according to my beliefs), and God still makes miracles nowadays (in my life, for instance), so I'm not really getting your point.

[Miserabilia]

This.. thread turned.. sad

If someone could present a theory opposing evolution with the same degree of evidence the evolution is currently supported with then I'd imagine they would not be met with such a reaction - I should add that this has never happened, and that's why people who oppose evolution are met with incredulity, (etc.).

It's 'virtually certain' that evolution correctly captures how all living organisms today came to be. I should add however that with evolution there's still a tonne of debate surrounding its processes and the complexities of its mechanisms - so people are constantly trying to disprove different elements of evolution and provide alternative explanations in regards to its workings: evolution as described today has come massively far since Darwin.

This, is a pretty important post.

[thewilddog]

Once again, people are trying to compare science and religion, two things that are opposite by nature. It's like trying to compare black and white, it's just like the extreme opposite. As someone else has already said, religion will never ever be proved using scientific and logical methods. You can't prove God's existence using laboratory experimentations and methods, it's just ridiculous.



These sentences show how hidebound certain people can be. If you need to see something in order to believe in it, and if you will only believe in something that can only be verified using "science", and if you keep clinging to those thoughts, then all this debate around religion and science is just useless. It seems to me you simply can't even idealise the concept of "faith", the concept of believing in something, not because you see it, but because you can feel it.

You don't see the wind, right? Air is invisible. Do you believe that the wind exists or not? It would be dumb not to believe in it, because you can feel its effects. You can feel the wind touching you skin, or blowing your hair, or making the renowned Dutch windmills work.

Do you see magnetic fields, for instance? Nope, but the truth is, when you approach a magnet to an iron nail, it instantly pulls it in its direction.

Now, have I ever seen God? No, I haven't, but I feel his presence in my life, and I feel that whatever I'm doing, he's watching me, and looking after me.

I don't need science to prove me anything, I don't need science to prove the existence of something I know that exists not because someone has told me, but because of my own faith. But, of course, you can't understand this, can you? It's not your fault, though, it's the way the system we live in is designed.
AMEN!! this is just PERFECT!!!! XD

[ShineintheDark]

This is 4 years old. Don't respond to threads older than 2 months or they're locked

[NoLimitGuy]

Religion is for weak or scared people without logic or rational thinking... These zombified preachers can never be takes seriously on any matter as they use biblical mithology almost as a facts book...

[Jinglebottom]

This thread was bumped. :locked: