Religious Beliefs/Philosophy talk

[russwest0]

Yo, interested in hearing what everyones religious beliefs are and WHY.

Me personally, agnostic. No evidence and shit that seems like it was totally made up to control and manipulate = show me homie and I'll believe

[Ancient Legend]

Yo, interested in hearing what everyone's religious beliefs are and WHY.

Me personally, agnostic. No evidence and shit that seems like it was totally made up = show me homie and I'll believe

There has to be a Creator. Everything came from something. The Universe and Life can't just have randomly turned out into what it is. You can't just toss a 1000 piece puzzle in the air and have it land arranged.

If that Creator is the one from the Bible or something else is another point of discussion.

[russwest0]

There has to be a Creator. Everything came from something. The Universe and Life can't just have randomly turned out into what it is. You can't just toss a 1000 piece puzzle in the air and have it land arranged.

If that Creator is the one from the Bible or something else is another point of discussion.

Well yes, I agree with the theory that something can't spawn from nothing. I just think religion was created by scared people looking for answers to questions that had none.

[ace23]

There has to be a Creator. Everything came from something. The Universe and Life can't just have randomly turned out into what it is. You can't just toss a 1000 piece puzzle in the air and have it land arranged
Who said it's arranged?

To answer OP, I used to be religious. Recently dropped Christianity.

[miller-time]

There has to be a Creator. Everything came from something. The Universe and Life can't just have randomly turned out into what it is. You can't just toss a 1000 piece puzzle in the air and have it land arranged.

If that Creator is the one from the Bible or something else is another point of discussion.

Having a creator doesn't solve the problem though. It just pushes it back. Who created the creator? Oh he has always been here? Then that negates the point about something having to have a creator. A creator is a far more complex thing to start with than a universe. If the arrangement of atoms and molecules is a stumbling block then how is having an all powerful all intelligent infinitely more complex super being more plausible?

[QUIZZLE]

https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/t1/62065_10152266391391159_2035734090_n.jpg

[Dresta]

No, not again.

[Ancient Legend]

Who said it's arranged?


The laws of physics do. Everything is bound to them. Nothing can act outside of them.

[chosen_one6]

I find it hard to believe that some super all-knowing being created the billions of stars and planets in the universe.

[HarryCallahan]

The laws of physics do. Everything is bound to them. Nothing can act outside of them.

Cept me.... I guess I'm just a bad cvnt like that.

[ace23]

The laws of physics do. Everything is bound to them. Nothing can act outside of them.
You're not making any sense.

[HarryCallahan]

I find it hard to believe that some super all-knowing being created the billions of stars and planets in the universe.

Why does it have to be all knowing? What if our creator was a fat retard and the stars are his farts, and all the planet are it's sh*t. Mafvckas all jump to that all knowing aspect, our creator could just as easily be the spastic stepbrother of the god-family.

[Dresta]

We could all be the playthings of some sadistic piece of shit. God doesn't have to be benevolent.

[russwest0]

Having a creator doesn't solve the problem though. It just pushes it back. Who created the creator? Oh he has always been here? Then that negates the point about something having to have a creator. A creator is a far more complex thing to start with than a universe. If the arrangement of atoms and molecules is a stumbling block then how is having an all powerful all intelligent infinitely more complex super being more plausible?

:applause: :applause: :applause:

God Paradox #1,354

"If God doesn't know what lust feels like, he isn't all knowing. If God knows what lust feels like, he isn't all good."

[Ancient Legend]

Having a creator doesn't solve the problem though. It just pushes it back. Who created the creator? Oh he has always been here? Then that negates the point about something having to have a creator. A creator is a far more complex thing to start with than a universe. If the arrangement of atoms and molecules is a stumbling block then how is having an all powerful all intelligent infinitely more complex super being more plausible?


Why do scientists become excited when they discover stone tools with bones in a cave? Because the tools show signs of intelligence. They know these tools could not have designed themselves but that are the product of intelligent input.

The human brain is much more complex than the most complicated computer ever built. Wouldn't it be logical to assume that if man's highly intelligent brain designed the computer, then the human brain was also the product of intelligent design?

As from where God came from, he wasn't created, otherwise he wouldn't be God. He is outside of time, with no beginning or end. We can't comprehend him or we would be at his level of understanding and he wouldn't be God anymore. Just like ants can't understand how a computer works.

There are some things that have been attributed to God by religious organizations in the past that have been proven false before, like the World being 6000 years old as some believe, but these are nuts who can't reconcile science with an intelligent being.

[chosen_one6]

Why does it have to be all knowing? What if our creator was a fat retard and the stars are his farts, and all the planet are it's sh*t. Mafvckas all jump to that all knowing aspect, our creator could just as easily be the spastic stepbrother of the god-family.

Someone with the ability to create all of this shit has to be all-knowing.

It takes a certain level of genius to accomplish it, in my opinion.

That's why I find it extremely hard to believe.

[Ancient Legend]

:applause: :applause: :applause:

God Paradox #1,354

"If God doesn't know what lust feels like, he isn't all knowing. If God knows what lust feels like, he isn't all good."

Well our mistake is trying to fit God in a human logic.

"If he's all powerful, can he create a stone so heavy that even he can't lift"

That is a logical impossibility such as water not being wet, or a square circle. God does not work in logical impossible things.

[Ancient Legend]

Can someone solve this one:

If Pinocchio said "my nose will grow now" would it?

:rockon:

[LongLiveTheKing]

Yo, interested in hearing what everyones religious beliefs are and WHY.

Me personally, agnostic. No evidence and shit that seems like it was totally made up to control and manipulate = show me homie and I'll believe
Same. Its really hard to believe the bible.

[ace23]

The human brain is much more complex than the most complicated computer ever built. Wouldn't it be logical to assume that if man's highly intelligent brain designed the computer, then the human brain was also the product of intelligent design?
No

[HarryCallahan]

Someone with the ability to create all of this shit has to be all-knowing.

It takes a certain level of genius to accomplish it, in my opinion.

That's why I find it extremely hard to believe.

If they were so smart, then why do we suffer and die? Why are there such horrible people walking around? Seems to me like a supremely perfect all-knowing being could've done better. Maybe we're what comes out of that perfect beings butt.

[chosen_one6]

If they were so smart, then why do we suffer and die? Why are there such horrible people walking around? Seems to me like a supremely perfect all-knowing being could've done better. Maybe we're what comes out of that perfect beings butt.

You're asking the wrong person my friend. I don't believe in creationism. :D

[HarryCallahan]

You're asking the wrong person my friend. I don't believe in creationism. :D

I believe in creationism via the butt.

[Jameerthefear]

Christian

[chosen_one6]

I believe in creationism via the butt.

http://i.imgur.com/uyR91Li.jpg?1

[HarryCallahan]

Christian

Let me be very clear about this; God definitely frowns upon your anime lust.

[BrownEye007]

I'm an atheist. I believed in God as a little kid. When I was about 8 my grandma told me the story of Noah's Ark and one other story out of the bible (can't remember which) and told me things like God knew every thought I ever had or ever would have. It was shortly after hearing those stories I started considering that God might not be real. For about 6 years after that I told myself I didn't believe in God but I didn't tell anybody else and really had no reasons to back up why. Until I was introduced to "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins when I was 14. Ever since reading that book I've viewed religion as more of a cancer to society than anything else. And I'm a little rusty now because it's been a while but for a while I could counter pretty much any pro-religion argument people threw at me.

[kNIOKAS]

I would gladly make a reply to some of you but this page is ruined by that ****.

[chosen_one6]

"I would gladly make a reply to some of you but this page is ruined by that ****."

:lol

[Dresta]

Why do scientists become excited when they discover stone tools with bones in a cave? Because the tools show signs of intelligence. They know these tools could not have designed themselves but that are the product of intelligent input.

The human brain is much more complex than the most complicated computer ever built. Wouldn't it be logical to assume that if man's highly intelligent brain designed the computer, then the human brain was also the product of intelligent design?

As from where God came from, he wasn't created, otherwise he wouldn't be God. He is outside of time, with no beginning or end. We can't comprehend him or we would be at his level of understanding and he wouldn't be God anymore. Just like ants can't understand how a computer works.

.This argument is incredibly idiotic and you should be ashamed for forwarding it.

There is not a logical continuation from your premise to your conclusion. That the human brain is the most complex thing we know of does not mean that it has been designed by somebody, and there is no evidence aside from your clear leap of faith in its favour. On the other hand, there is a lot of evidence showing spontaneous order to be the most effective means of creating complex organisms, organisations, societies and institutions. Our sense of morality itself has evolved through a complex process of trial and error where those that are behaviours beneficial to society are esteemed, and those that tear the fabric of society are abhorred.

As put by Adam Ferguson: 'Every step and every movement of the multitude, even in what are termed enlightened ages, are made with equal blindness to the future; and nations stumble upon establishments, which are indeed the result of human action, but not the execution of any human design.' - As soon as people start forcing their own designs we get Robespierre, we get Soviet Communism, we get Nazism etc.

In terms of natural evolution, look at what happens when people alter the natural process by breeding animals like pitbulls - you get a creature in constant pain that is incapable of reproducing without human assistance.

The human brain has evolved from single cell organisms through a process of trial and error that has extended several billion years. If life on earth is looked at as a linear year, then the human species only came into existence at something like 23.50 on December 31. This selection is random and is dependant on environment, and there is no need or reason for it to have been planned, nor is there any reason why a plan would have to take such a long time.

I could perhaps explain it better but i've not slept in 30 hours and cba. You can do your own reading if you want; start here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_order

You will be able to find plenty of relevant material branching out from there. But please, let this ridiculously trite and trivial 'OMG it so complex it must be designed' argument rest.

edit: delete that ****ing picture chosen one

[HarryCallahan]

I'm an atheist. I believed in God as a little kid. When I was about 8 my grandma told me the story of Noah's Ark and one other story out of the bible (can't remember which) and told me things like God knew every thought I ever had or ever would have. It was shortly after hearing those stories I started considering that God might not be real. For about 6 years after that I told myself I didn't believe in God but I didn't tell anybody else and really had no reasons to back up why. Until I was introduced to "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins when I was 14. Ever since reading that book I've viewed religion as more of a cancer to society than anything else. And I'm a little rusty now because it's been a while but for a while I could counter pretty much any pro-religion argument people threw at me.

You mean Dawkins could counter it and you could recite parts of his book....

[Dresta]

I'm just gonna repost on this page because chosen one is such a jackass:


Why do scientists become excited when they discover stone tools with bones in a cave? Because the tools show signs of intelligence. They know these tools could not have designed themselves but that are the product of intelligent input.

The human brain is much more complex than the most complicated computer ever built. Wouldn't it be logical to assume that if man's highly intelligent brain designed the computer, then the human brain was also the product of intelligent design?

As from where God came from, he wasn't created, otherwise he wouldn't be God. He is outside of time, with no beginning or end. We can't comprehend him or we would be at his level of understanding and he wouldn't be God anymore. Just like ants can't understand how a computer works.

.This argument is incredibly idiotic and you should be ashamed for forwarding it.

There is not a logical continuation from your premise to your conclusion. That the human brain is the most complex thing we know of does not mean that it has been designed by somebody, and there is no evidence aside from your clear leap of faith in its favour. On the other hand, there is a lot of evidence showing spontaneous order to be the most effective means of creating complex organisms, organisations, societies and institutions. Our sense of morality itself has evolved through a complex process of trial and error where those that are behaviours beneficial to society are esteemed, and those that tear the fabric of society are abhorred.

As put by Adam Ferguson: 'Every step and every movement of the multitude, even in what are termed enlightened ages, are made with equal blindness to the future; and nations stumble upon establishments, which are indeed the result of human action, but not the execution of any human design.' - As soon as people start forcing their own designs we get Robespierre, we get Soviet Communism, we get Nazism etc.

In terms of natural evolution, look at what happens when people alter the natural process by breeding animals like pitbulls - you get a creature in constant pain that is incapable of reproducing without human assistance.

The human brain has evolved from single cell organisms through a process of trial and error that has extended several billion years. If life on earth is looked at as a linear year, then the human species only came into existence at something like 23.50 on December 31. This selection is random and is dependant on environment, and there is no need or reason for it to have been planned, nor is there any reason why a plan would have to take such a long time.

I could perhaps explain it better but i've not slept in 30 hours and cba. You can do your own reading if you want; start here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_order

You will be able to find plenty of relevant material branching out from there. But please, let this ridiculously trite and trivial 'OMG it so complex it must be designed' argument rest.

[Al Thorton]

I'm compelled to share an anecdote with you guys about philosophy and belief systems

[chosen_one6]

I'm just gonna repost on this page because chosen one is such a jackass:

This argument is incredibly idiotic and you should be ashamed for forwarding it.

There is not a logical continuation from your premise to your conclusion. That the human brain is the most complex thing we know of does not mean that it has been designed by somebody, and there is no evidence aside from your clear leap of faith in its favour. On the other hand, there is a lot of evidence showing spontaneous order to be the most effective means of creating complex organisms, organisations, societies and institutions. Our sense of morality itself has evolved through a complex process of trial and error where those that are behaviours beneficial to society are esteemed, and those that tear the fabric of society are abhorred.

As put by Adam Ferguson: 'Every step and every movement of the multitude, even in what are termed enlightened ages, are made with equal blindness to the future; and nations stumble upon establishments, which are indeed the result of human action, but not the execution of any human design.' - As soon as people start forcing their own designs we get Robespierre, we get Soviet Communism, we get Nazism etc.

In terms of natural evolution, look at what happens when people alter the natural process by breeding animals like pitbulls - you get a creature in constant pain that is incapable of reproducing without human assistance.

The human brain has evolved from single cell organisms through a process of trial and error that has extended several billion years. If life on earth is looked at as a linear year, then the human species only came into existence at something like 23.50 on December 31. This selection is random and is dependant on environment, and there is no need or reason for it to have been planned, nor is there any reason why a plan would have to take such a long time.

I could perhaps explain it better but i've not slept in 30 hours and cba. You can do your own reading if you want; start here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_order

You will be able to find plenty of relevant material branching out from there. But please, let this ridiculously trite and trivial 'OMG it so complex it must be designed' argument rest.

Lol Josh was right, you do get angry easily :roll:

[Angel Face]

Sometimes I believe, sometimes I don't and I don't care about religion.

What to call that? Agnostic?

[rip2]

I actually went through a catholic school, despite my family not being that religious. So through elementary, I learned all about the Bible, how God created the Universe in 7 days etc.

The funny thing is.. back then, even as a kid, I really thought it was just a hyperbole or something.. I never took it literally that God created the universe in 7 days. Then as I grew up and saw more religious people.. I found out they believe it literally.. :lol

So as I grew up, although I respect the religion and all.. deep in my heart I can only say that the more I know, the less I believe. Today I'm pretty much an atheist, although I see no need to persuade anyone or try to rile up the religious people. Apparently, it does good to them and provide them a good guideline to life, so why should I knock?

And towards the atheist side.. I am more or less towards the conclusion that there is simply no meaning in life. And this is someone who enjoys life a lot. But seeing so many people, places, different lives.. you think, does it really matter that much? Why care so much? Does anything matter that much if you're going to die and disappear forever? So I'm caring less and less, and thinking people are simply overcomplicating things, and worrying too much about useless things.

That is my current stance.

[HarryCallahan]

Sometimes I believe, sometimes I don't and I don't care about religion.

What to call that? Agnostic?

Indecisive fgt.

[Lonely_Sandberg]

God is here! God is everywhere. He walks with me through sunshine and rain. He protects me from temptation. He is my life.

[RoseCity07]

There has to be a Creator. Everything came from something. The Universe and Life can't just have randomly turned out into what it is. You can't just toss a 1000 piece puzzle in the air and have it land arranged.

If that Creator is the one from the Bible or something else is another point of discussion.

Thank you, now I can completely disregard everything you write on this message board. This sort of thinking makes no sense. There has to be creator because you can't figure why the universe exists and you want to avoid on existential meltdown. You have a vested interest in believing there is a creator. It doesn't mean there is one.

[GaryRaymond23]

You can't get a touchier subject than this lol.

I went through Catholic schooling from 1st grade through my Senior year of high school. Although I'm not religious myself, I studied heavily in to various religions so I could intelligently play devil's advocate to all my religion teachers.

Being a realist, I don't necessarily believe in any of them - I'm still torn on whether or not there's a higher power or we just somehow evolved throughout the years. There's no right or wrong answer really, you can literally disprove somebody's entire beliefs no matter the case. It's all up to your personal belief and what you have faith in.

The fact of the matter is, nobody truly knows until you die - then I'm sure the answer will become clear.

[97 bulls]

I continue to hear all these posters say God isn't the reason for us being here. Even calling it idiotic. But none want to explain their view

[nathanjizzle]

the created will never be conscious enough to know what it was created for or who created it.

Think of mans most intelligent creation, it would mostlikely be "watson" the IBM computer. But yet it isnt actually conscious or alive. It doesnt know why it was created or who created it, it is only running programs.

This concept goes the same with humans, we are the created, our level of consciousness cannot comprehend why we are created nor who is the creator.

[Bush4Ever]

Stalin and Mao killed tens of millions of people.

Therefore, Theism is correct.

QED

[Rolando]

the created will never be conscious enough to know what it was created for or who created it.

Think of mans most intelligent creation, it would mostlikely be "watson" the IBM computer. But yet it isnt actually conscious or alive. It doesnt know why it was created or who created it, it is only running programs.

This concept goes the same with humans, we are the created, our level of consciousness cannot comprehend why we are created nor who is the creator.

I disagree. If indeed we were "created in God's image" and, as I believe Jesus meant it, we are "Sons of God", we do have a shot at attaining "Godlike" consciousness.

[Jailblazers7]

I find Emerson's take on Jesus in his Divinity School Address much more powerful than the his traditional treatment as a divine figure.


Jesus Christ belonged to the true race of prophets. He saw with open eye the mystery of the soul. Drawn by its severe harmony, ravished with its beauty, he lived in it, and had his being there. Alone in all history, he estimated the greatness of man. One man was true to what is in you and me. He saw that God incarnates himself in man, and evermore goes forth anew to take possession of his world. He said, in this jubilee of sublime emotion, `I am divine. Through me, God acts; through me, speaks. Would you see God, see me; or, see thee, when thou also thinkest as I now think.' But what a distortion did his doctrine and memory suffer in the same, in the next, and the following ages! There is no doctrine of the Reason which will bear to be taught by the Understanding. The understanding caught this high chant from the poet's lips, and said, in the next age, `This was Jehovah come down out of heaven. I will kill you, if you say he was a man.' The idioms of his language, and the figures of his rhetoric, have usurped the place of his truth; and churches are not built on his principles, but on his tropes. Christianity became a Mythus, as the poetic teaching of Greece and of Egypt, before. He spoke of miracles; for he felt that man's life was a miracle, and all that man doth, and he knew that this daily miracle shines, as the character ascends. But the word Miracle, as pronounced by Christian churches, gives a false impression; it is Monster. It is not one with the blowing clover and the falling rain.

[CelticBaller]

Christian, in a sense that I follow Jesus doctrines, but not very religious

[russwest0]

I continue to hear all these posters say God isn't the reason for us being here. Even calling it idiotic. But none want to explain their view

The burden of proof isn't on those who question others, it's on those who claim god to be real.

[97 bulls]

The burden of proof isn't on those who question others, it's on those who claim to be real.
But one of the reasons people use to show that God is real is by showing his works. Humans, the Earth etc. Atheists claim its silly. Id like to get your opinion on how man was created

[97 bulls]

For the record. I believe Jesus is Gods Son and not God himself. He has been given authority by God

[rip2]

But one of the reasons people use to show that God is real is by showing his works. Humans, the Earth etc. Atheists claim its silly. Id like to get your opinion on how man was created
How did those people show the work? Prove to me that God made humans and the Earth?

[dr.hee]

How did those people show the work? Prove to me that God made humans and the Earth?

He'll most likely tell you that *insert any scientific approximation of evolutionary mechanisms* is far more complicated and unlikely than *insert any religious story about an anthorpomorphic agent creating everything for mankind*...

[kNIOKAS]

I'm an atheist. I believed in God as a little kid. When I was about 8 my grandma told me the story of Noah's Ark and one other story out of the bible (can't remember which) and told me things like God knew every thought I ever had or ever would have. It was shortly after hearing those stories I started considering that God might not be real. For about 6 years after that I told myself I didn't believe in God but I didn't tell anybody else and really had no reasons to back up why. Until I was introduced to "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins when I was 14. Ever since reading that book I've viewed religion as more of a cancer to society than anything else. And I'm a little rusty now because it's been a while but for a while I could counter pretty much any pro-religion argument people threw at me.
You may want to reconsider that. It's not black and white, never is. I've read a half of that book, it had a vibe Dawkins was missing on something that the religion apologets are missing out on, too. But a good book, anyway.

[Dresta]

I continue to hear all these posters say God isn't the reason for us being here. Even calling it idiotic. But none want to explain their view
err... i already explained how complex organisms arise through spontaneous order, and that the most complex things are never designed, but arise through a process of trial and error over a long period of time.

Yes, the 'design' theory is idiotic because it has no logical congruity between its premise and conclusions, and yet it still makes a positive assertion. You keep constructing those straw men to justify your preposterous beliefs; nobody in here has made a positive assertion about the nonexistence of God (those all come from the Theists in this thread), they've simply said that they can find no reason to believe in his existence, which is a negative assertion. Learn that there is a difference, and that one is dogmatic, while the other isn't.

[BrownEye007]

You mean Dawkins could counter it and you could recite parts of his book....
No I could because I learned what was in his book... That's like saying I learned how to do problems out of my high school math textbook, but I don't actually know how to do them just how to copy them. Some of the arguments that Dawkins presents in the book aren't his own but the thoughts of other scientists so I don't see what the problem is :confusedshrug:

[BrownEye007]

You may want to reconsider that. It's not black and white, never is. I've read a half of that book, it had a vibe Dawkins was missing on something that the religion apologets are missing out on, too. But a good book, anyway.
Haha yeah it's completely lacking the other sides perspective just like religious people do to atheism. I've read lots of books about religion and spoken to many a people about their religious views so that's not an opinion solely based on "The God Delusion", it was just one of the biggest influencing factors.

[Dresta]

Prefer Hitchens' book to the God Delusion because his argument is that the Judeo-Christian belief system is offensive to human dignity because it claims human morality is externally imposed rather than inherent and intuitive, which is also why it is so corrupting, and will always breed fanatics seeking to impose their divine moral order onto others.

[97 bulls]

err... i already explained how complex organisms arise through spontaneous order, and that the most complex things are never designed, but arise through a process of trial and error over a long period of time.

Yes, the 'design' theory is idiotic because it has no logical congruity between its premise and conclusions, and yet it still makes a positive assertion. You keep constructing those straw men to justify your preposterous beliefs; nobody in here has made a positive assertion about the nonexistence of God (those all come from the Theists in this thread), they've simply said that they can find no reason to believe in his existence, which is a negative assertion. Learn that there is a difference, and that one is dogmatic, while the other isn't.
Lol "spontaneous order"? In other words, the "big bang theory". Thats the dumbest reasoning I've ever heard.

Just admit. People like you refuse God simply because the structure and laws is in direct contrast with your morals.

[BrownEye007]

Lol "spontaneous order"? In other words, the "big bang theory". Thats the dumbest reasoning I've ever heard.

Just admit. People like you refuse God simply because the structure and laws is in direct contrast with your morals.
Idk about Dresta but I refuse God because the idea of a God is just silly to me. I questioned Gods existence before I had even developed my own set of morals. The only reason I accepted a christian God earlier in life when I was really young was because, like most of kids that age, I believed everything my parents told me. Religious peoples main reason for accepting God is pretty much, "I've been brainwashed my whole life to have faith so now I do".

[Dresta]

Lol "spontaneous order"? In other words, the "big bang theory". Thats the dumbest reasoning I've ever heard.

Just admit. People like you refuse God simply because the structure and laws is in direct contrast with your morals.
err.. no. True, i find religious morality to be repugnant and to be a stultifier of social and economic progress, but that is not my reason for not believing it. Remember, you are the one making a positive assertion here, not me, so you are the one that has to provide evidence to justify your assertion. I wonder in what other subject you would make such grand and positive assertions without any reason to think them. Finding other reasonings illogical is not a justification for believing something else dogmatically and with no supporting evidence.

I said nothing about the big bang theory, i was talking about how humans and modern human society came to be, not the cosmic beginnings of the universe. Laugh at spontaneous order all you like, but it is the reason your brain is the way it is, and also the reason why human civilisation has developed so successfully.

[Levity]

is there a title/belief for someone who just doesnt care about that stuff; has no interest in trying to debate what the reason for anything is.

i dont think atheist qualifies, since youre not disbelieving god. but does this fall under agnostic?

[Dresta]

is there a title/belief for someone who just doesnt care about that stuff; has no interest in trying to debate what the reason for anything is.

i dont think atheist qualifies, since youre not disbelieving god. but does this fall under agnostic?
If you had belief you would care, so you are atheist.

[miller-time]

is there a title/belief for someone who just doesnt care about that stuff; has no interest in trying to debate what the reason for anything is.

i dont think atheist qualifies, since youre not disbelieving god. but does this fall under agnostic?

All of these concepts really just describe what your position is. If you don't hold a belief in God, whether it is because you haven't thought about it and don't care or if you have spent a lot of time contemplating it you are an Atheist.

By your description I would say you would qualify as an Agnostic Atheist. Someone who doesn't have a belief in God but also doesn't say God doesn't exist either.

[97 bulls]

err.. no. True, i find religious morality to be repugnant and to be a stultifier of social and economic progress, but that is not my reason for not believing it. Remember, you are the one making a positive assertion here, not me, so you are the one that has to provide evidence to justify your assertion. I wonder in what other subject you would make such grand and positive assertions without any reason to think them. Finding other reasonings illogical is not a justification for believing something else dogmatically and with no supporting evidence.

I said nothing about the big bang theory, i was talking about how humans and modern human society came to be, not the cosmic beginnings of the universe. Laugh at spontaneous order all you like, but it is the reason your brain is the way it is, and also the reason why human civilisation has developed so successfully.
Yes. I did assert that God is real. And I gave a reason that YOU disagree with. So I asked you to explain how mankind came into existence. Even if you feel our evolutionary parents were micro organisms that evolved into what we are today, where did that organisms origins come from?

I also would appreciate you answering how believing in God stunts the development of mankinds social and ecconomic progess.

In fact, I'd gladly debate you and anyone else as to how not having God hurts mankind.

[Dresta]

Yes. I did assert that God is real. And I gave a reason that YOU disagree with. So I asked you to explain how mankind came into existence. Even if you feel our evolutionary parents were micro organisms that evolved into what we are today, where did that organisms origins come from?

I also would appreciate you answering how believing in God stunts the development of mankinds social and ecconomic progess.

In fact, I'd gladly debate you and anyone else as to how not having God hurts mankind.
Life can arise on its own provided the right conditions:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis

'The Oparin-Haldane hypothesis suggests that the atmosphere of the early Earth may have been chemically reducing in nature, composed primarily of methane (CH4), ammonia (NH3), water (H2O), hydrogen sulfide (H2S), carbon dioxide (CO2) or carbon monoxide (CO), and phosphate (PO43-), with molecular oxygen (O2) and ozone (O3) either rare or absent.

In such a reducing atmosphere, electrical activity can catalyze the creation of certain basic small molecules (monomers) of life, such as amino acids. This was demonstrated in the Miller

[1987_Lakers]

Don't talk to me about religion.

Religion is used as a tool to control & divide people.

God is Love, If God was the way the bible described him I would tell him to go **** himself.

[JUDGE WITNESS]

mormonism
catholicism
islam
hinduism
judaism
paganism

take your pick

[97 bulls]

[QUOTE=Dresta]Life can arise on its own provided the right conditions:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis

'The Oparin-Haldane hypothesis suggests that the atmosphere of the early Earth may have been chemically reducing in nature, composed primarily of methane (CH4), ammonia (NH3), water (H2O), hydrogen sulfide (H2S), carbon dioxide (CO2) or carbon monoxide (CO), and phosphate (PO43-), with molecular oxygen (O2) and ozone (O3) either rare or absent.

In such a reducing atmosphere, electrical activity can catalyze the creation of certain basic small molecules (monomers) of life, such as amino acids. This was demonstrated in the Miller

[97 bulls]

Don't talk to me about religion.

Religion is used as a tool to control & divide people.

God is Love, If God was the way the bible described him I would tell him to go **** himself.This is an extreme stance. Just about anything can and is used to manipulate and divide people

How is he described in the bible according to your POV?

[Micku]

As from where God came from, he wasn't created, otherwise he wouldn't be God. He is outside of time, with no beginning or end. We can't comprehend him or we would be at his level of understanding and he wouldn't be God anymore. Just like ants can't understand how a computer works.


Well, time itself is a measurement of change. It's a language that we use to measure the duration of events. When God started to make decision of being a creator, that itself is a change thus he is within a timeframe. What did he think of before being a creator? Were there events that followed up to it? If so, then that's time.

Whatever changes he made exist in time. This include thinking of something, subatomic particles movement, or thought process, anything that involve motion or change is time. We don't know how can something exist without change or a space to occupy it. Anything that exist outside of time is forever unchangeable, right? It's like if the creator was forever in a stasis until the creator decided to change. Might as well say that he didn't exist until time because there is no movement, no motion, no thought; it is nothing. We also cannot imagine anything operating without time. So, it is beyond our comprehend if it even exist as you said.

You can also say there is dimension beyond the creator dimension that our creator have no way of knowing while having no evidence to it. But we do not know whatever or not God is eternal. We do not know whatever something could exist outside of time and space and we don't know the rules of another dimension. As you said, we may not be able to comprehend these rules. We don't know if it exist or not. For all we know, God could be energy and matter. Since energy isn't created or destroyed and it simply changes from one form to another. At least from what we know of.

If a intelligent designer did exist (doesn't have to be the God or Yahweh of the bible), I would assume he just created the laws of physics and let energy be converted into subatomic particles like protons, neutrons, and electrons. Dark energy to expand the universe and make it cooler for subatomic particles to form and atoms. This will lead to hydrogen which will lead to nuclear fusion thus stars, which lead to other elements. Don't really need much else other than matter (dark matter) with gravity. Basically the four fundamental forces of the universe. With the forces operating together, you could have solar systems, stars, planets, and everything else operating. Life could also be created due to this.

But the true answer to everything at this point is that we don't know. There isn't proof of a designer or lack there of. The only answer that we have is that we don't know. We also may never find out. We could either die before our knowledge grows or we could be too stupid to comprehend it. The scary thing is that we could also be the smartest lifeforms in our universe. We only understand about 4% of our universe probably. The rest is dark matter and dark energy.

[Stuckey]

just got into cognitive something something something

basically it's to identify your beliefs and thoughts regarding certain topics or situations when we are faced with them, and dispute these beliefs, then feel better

in other words, simple buddhist sh17

anyways, I also did a guided meditation with this youtube video, it was like 3 minutes and was something like that guided meditation from the movie, Fight Club

felt good brehs

anyways

[Swaggin916]

My philosophy is to challenge everything you believe in. Take some time to appreciate your ah ha moment... then get busy again.

[Rolando]

I find Emerson's take on Jesus in his Divinity School Address much more powerful than the his traditional treatment as a divine figure.

"Jesus Christ belonged to the true race of prophets. He saw with open eye the mystery of the soul. Drawn by its severe harmony, ravished with its beauty, he lived in it, and had his being there. Alone in all history, he estimated the greatness of man. One man was true to what is in you and me. He saw that God incarnates himself in man, and evermore goes forth anew to take possession of his world. He said, in this jubilee of sublime emotion, `I am divine. Through me, God acts; through me, speaks. Would you see God, see me; or, see thee, when thou also thinkest as I now think.' But what a distortion did his doctrine and memory suffer in the same, in the next, and the following ages! There is no doctrine of the Reason which will bear to be taught by the Understanding. The understanding caught this high chant from the poet's lips, and said, in the next age, `This was Jehovah come down out of heaven. I will kill you, if you say he was a man.' The idioms of his language, and the figures of his rhetoric, have usurped the place of his truth; and churches are not built on his principles, but on his tropes. Christianity became a Mythus, as the poetic teaching of Greece and of Egypt, before. He spoke of miracles; for he felt that man's life was a miracle, and all that man doth, and he knew that this daily miracle shines, as the character ascends. But the word Miracle, as pronounced by Christian churches, gives a false impression; it is Monster. It is not one with the blowing clover and the falling rain. " :applause:

Thanks for that. Looks like there are some people out there in the world that actually "get it".