Religion

[Ligic_Tha_Master]

That was a mistake Jacob.

*Shoots himin the head with a desert eagle*

[gryphon]

I sence a conspiracy. We all where away [ I myself for about 1.5 week ] for some time for our own personal reason and the remaining members start worshipping Gobalopper. This can't be right ?

But some remarks about "friends" in religion.

You should "love" the persone besides you. But a lot of religions make you "love the persone besides you" more than you [ should ] "love" yourself. Now that can't be right. "loving" the other more than yourslef ? You can "love" the other as mutch as yourself but no more. That woulnd't be ethical [ I know it's a big thing ] to love others more than you love yourself. Because religion in a way also tells us that we are all unique and pressious in our own way. We can't be missed becouse ,.. . well you get my point.

[ I've translated it with "love", the meaning of that words is that you should respect and help your fellow persone. I've that's not clear don't start arguing with that just ask what I mean with that : ]

[Edric O]

The truth, Nema? You can't handle the truth!! ;) You took the easy path. Atheism requires nothing of you.

My priorities lie in the common good of all mankind. And they happen to coincide with God's priorities.

As for religious charities, I'm not saying your reasons do not fit. But I'm pointing out that it's just as likely that they are honest christians who love their fellow men. And your argument of greed is faulty. Non-christians can't be converted by greed because you can't be greedy of something you believe doesn't exist. If you think heaven exists, then you are a Christian and you also think your sould will go to heaven after you die. You are saved - no greed. If you are not a christian, then you don't believe there is a heaven to be greedy about!

So you want to give your body to science, Nema? Okay, if you don't mind being used as spare parts. Can I keep your brain? I could start a collection. :)

Acriku, you forget one thing. Whatever the case, I CAN'T find out my life was a lie. You can, however. And you will, unfortunatelly... :-/

I wasn't aware you were jewish, Acriku. For some reason I'm under the impression you're an atheist... now why could that be? ::) The problem with Jewdaism is that it's a *bit* behind. The long-awaited Messiah finally came 2000 years ago, but naturally not everyone saw Him as such. Jews *were* God's chosen people. As of 2000 years ago, there is no more chosen people. Christianity is universal.

Please don't get offended by something I didn't say! Jewdaism is by no means being "held up" by Christianity. I NEVER said it was! I also never said jews back us up on our faith! Of course they don't! But they are the only Great Religion that doesn't try to hit us in the back while we're down (see Islam). That's nice of them. ;) Please remind your friends at the Synagogue that we worship the same God. And tell them a crazy christian you met on the internet wanted to tell them that Christ loves them.

Basically, you misunderstood my good intentions when I was talking about jews.

Gryphon, your ethics confuse me. Please explain why do you think it's unethical to love others more than you love yourself.

[Acriku]

Edric, I said I was still Jewish, and living it's way of life. I just don't follow the Torah. Also, YOU believe Jesus was your messiah, the Jews that did believe back then made Christianity. I would be embarrased if my religion came from a bunch of guys with wishful thinking. Also, I apologize for misunderstanding, but the way I read it was Christianity added more stuff to the prophecies, and I got the impression you meant without Christianity the prophecies wasn't enough. As if Christianity came and saved the day for Judaism.

And Edric, I can only find out if I was wrong, and you can only find out if you were right. But then again my rolling in my grave was a joke not to have been taken seriously.

And I'm sorry if me and my friends get offended if someone else says their religion is right and ours is wrong. I'm sorry I get offended by trying to be pulled into the religion by ways of verbal force. I'm sorry I got offended by people trying to change my life, not always for the better.

How does the Islamic religion stab you in the back?

[gryphon]

You collect brains ;D I've always wonderd what they mean with "collecieve thinking" in C&C Yuri's revenge.

Religion make all persones equal. [ all "mortall" persones that are the children of God and sutch ]

But when you love others more than yourself, your are not eatch others equal. You are basically less than the persone you have to love more than yourself.

So religion states that you should love your fellow persone, but not that you should love him more than yourself. Mayby as mutch as yourslef but not more. If you should "have" to love your fellow persone more than yourself we are not all equals. And that in a way contradicts itself.

[nemafakei]

"Atheism requires nothing of you"

Wrong, as I have said since my third post in this topic. Being a devout atheist is hard in a community (and family) of christians.

"likely that they are honest christians who love their fellow men"

Quite possibly (ie my reason 3). But I was saying that atheists do the same - they just don't make charities called 'Atheist Aid'. That would just be silly.

"My priorities lie in the common good of all mankind"

That's also a good priority (I have the same to an extent), but it is not necessarily the priority of religion as an establishment...

"And your argument of greed is faulty" etc

No! My argument is that religion promises personal gain and so inspires the idea of greed, not that people convert out of greed.

[Acriku]

I agree with Nema, being an athiest surrounded by people who believe the opposite you do, it's tough. ESPECIALLY the family because they don't stop trying to get you into therapy  ;)

[gryphon]

"My priorities is the common good of all mankind"

Sound a bit like utilitarism ?

Could I compair it a bit with that ?

[Gobalopper]

I think my "worshippers" need to rethink their belief system, do not worship false gods!

I can't believe you guys are still arguing over this topic. It's obvious you will never argee with each other and there is no way to prove either side right or wrong conclusively. Believing in a God is based on faith and as far as I know there is no way to prove that.

Check out some of the articles at this site:

http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=articles

If you can prove evolution the author will give you $250,000. :)

http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=articles&specific=1

[Sardauker-Kirov]

Ummmm i can prove it yes :)

Homosapien 0% evolved.

Few billions years later: HomoSapien: 100% Evolved.

Yay im the winner  ;D

[gryphon]

How the *verry hot uncomfortable place made out of 7 layors acording to Dante* did you find that site ?! lol ;D

Only he offers it to proof it in empirical science. But empirical science isn't capable of proving itslef. Let alone other sciences.

The really weird part is, why does he ask that the theory has to proven with a method of science that based on it's own ground denies religious fait ? So if religious fait doesn't exists, how can you falsify or aprove it ?

It's like you have to explain quantum mechanics with Newtons theory. It's not possible.

And fait itself is easally been proven. It's just that we can give no reason [ and here the empirical part comes back again ] why we have this fait. Because fait doesn't only ly in religion. It's in evry thing we do. Evry day, with evrt desicion we make in a way we rely on fait. [ the problem of induction taken to its limits ] It apears that we can't live without fait.

So the real question is why our live is based upon fait and not upon "real" things. There has to be something we can see without relying on fait ?

[Gobalopper]

He was on the radio a while ago.

Well someone having faith is easy to prove but its not easy to prove that what you have faith in is true, or something like that. :)

Why is our life based on faith? Because there is so much that can't be proven by todays science, maybe in the future we will be able to but we can't right now.

[gryphon]

Yep, pricisly like that. :)

It's the problem of induction. You can't say for shure that results of the past are coherent with the future events.

Results of the past are no prediction for the future.

or better put "contstant samengaan is geen noodzakenlijk verband". In English that would be, a contstant coherant event [ 2 or more things that go together or follow eatchother ] doesn't mean that there is a nessesary direct connection between those events.

That's induction in short.

This means our live is based on fait because we can't explain even one thing that happends. We can predict events in a way, [ induction in it's pure extreem form even denies this ] but we can't give the real reason why things happen or are the way they are. Not just whith religious fait. Even with empirical scienses.

[ Mathematics we have created ourselfs in a way. [ If you should mention we havn't and it's a thing buy itself then you have the fait that it exists by itself. you can't prove this ] ]

We can't even explain our own science. It sounds strange buth think of it.

So I try to say that it's not because there is a lot that todays science can't explain. It's that we can't explain today's science. It's just that we know that it seems to work and therefor we use it. But we can't prove it.

And until we have a better science that works [ better than the one we have now ] we follow this science. After a while we belive the other science is "more compleat" and we belive [ put our fait ] in that one.

[jacobdouds]

*JacobDouds rises to his feet*

Ligic has a sudden bullet thru head and dies, I mean heart attack.

[gryphon]

Why ? or What ?

[ordos45]

evolution versus creation.  Go to www.religioustolerance.com

I started a thread against evolution there and I tihnk out of you guys only Edric O. would be able to duke it out with the people there.  If they were on this site this arguement woul have never reached 100 posts.

[Acriku]

Gob, I argue in this thread only to discuss and find out new information. I think religion is fascinating, and the fact that it guides people through their lives is fascinating.

Kirov, your posts make no sense....

[ordos45]

Hey I had to post this message, the one right after 666.  Anyhow here is a link to what some scientists think about evolution.

http://disc.server.com/Indices/148202.html

[jacobdouds]

hell, do you think it really exists? this is a debete I have to do for school.

[ordos45]

Yes

[ragnarok_blade]

http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_noway.htm

Just go there. It actually uses facts with its rebuttals.

[jacobdouds]

But what is it exactly. And the amount of people that die every day. There must be one que at Pearly Gates.

[Sardauker-Kirov]

That website above is just as Enlightning as the Program's you see every day on Discovery channel.

Its always the same thing.

Besides if in the beginning of the Universe has no Living Organic and non living Organic. How could live exist then?  They need to prove that

*Expects a Non logic Reason from the scientists*

(Ummmm ermmmm? They must be made of "Nova" matter in the stars )

[gryphon]

If you say there is a Heaven [ and Hell but that doesn't matter for this comment ] you also say we humans [ mayby other species as well ] have a "imortall" soul. A thing that is not compleatly attatched and one with our organic bady. So it exist anyway. And that about no organic live at the start of the univers [ no matter if it's true or not ] is compleatly useless. Because live itself is not an organic substance. It doesn't even have to be in our univers or obey to the current laws of the phisical univers.

But I agree about that site. A lot of the counter points they bring up are not based an "real" findings [ just as we still don't no a lot about the Egyptians, but this can't deny the fact that their is a enormous piramid ]. They also say that it's just 5% of the scientists that have their doubts about Darwin's theory of evolution. But a lot of the scientist don't agree compleatly with Darwin. He has gaps in his theory that he himself admits. So we can't go and fill them in. And that doesn't the whole theory isn't correct, just because he hasn't got all the answers.

Instead of saying that others are compleatly wrong and piss them off on those points without giving a good alternatieve or even give some constructieve critisism temselfs they could better formulate an opinion themself that has some truth in it.

[Acriku]

The way I see it is, Hell is a childish persuading tool to get people to do good or "their" way.

And also, Kirov, it may all be the same because facts cannot go two ways! Duh  ::)

And the people who think they are using science to help their God belief, they actually use distorted science, changing it to their needs. They keep bringing in the science arguements, only to get shot down badly by scientists loaded with the real facts.