Page 80 of 89 FirstFirst ... 30707576777879808182838485 ... LastLast
Results 1,581 to 1,600 of 1780
  1. #1581  
    One reason I have for being atheist is that everyone says god loves you so much and loves all his children, it just makes me wonder why a god that loves you so much would send you to a terrible place like hell?
  2.    #1582  
    Quote Originally Posted by Psychonaut View Post
    Just read the first page and will maybe pay a return visit to see if anyone replies directly to me, but maybe not. Anyway. Religion is not hogwash at worst. It's OUTRIGHT DANGEROUS at worst.
    You got that right (correct, that is)!!!

    It just takes one crazy fundamentalist
    I think you could insert any word here (or even remove it) and the meaning would not change (religion or not).

    ... Also I'm currently holding the opinion that in this modern age our social systems are in desperate need of SIGNIFICANT redesign if we're not going to destroy the planet and ourselves.
    Probably true, but who's going to do this (or will it ever happen)? I think life is what you (and we) make it. We each have power to make things better or worse. I suspect our purpose on Earth might have something to do with learning to live with each other. (Why else do we seem to innately believe that cooperation with others is important?)

    Organized religion has a vested interest (MONEY MONEY MONEY! POWER POWER POWER!) in keeping everything exactly the same. (Jesus will save us. We don't have to.)
    Do you prefer dis-organized religion (or would organized religion be OK if it did not ask for so much money)? I agree that thhe power should be in the hands of God and not man.

    Religion flies airplanes into buildings.
    Another stereotype (and somewhat unfair for you to make, in my opinion).

    There were multiple deaths in the middle east on account of some stupid guy saying he was planning on burning some paper.
    The guy clearly is a nut. Sometimes people dumber than ourselves do even dumber things that affect other people. Some believe that "paper" to be a sacred text. I will reserve comment as I have not read the Koran.

    Murders over cartoons.
    I think your points support why people become disgusted with religion in general. I guess an interesting question to ponder might be:
    if God exists, why does he allow such things to happen? (What do you think of the answer that was given in the "If you were God" article?)
    I'm both super! ... and a doer!
  3.    #1583  
    Quote Originally Posted by manordwall View Post
    One reason I have for being atheist is that everyone says god loves you so much and loves all his children, it just makes me wonder why a god that loves you so much would send you to a terrible place like hell?
    Perhaps it's more of a question of whether you choose to love Him? Hell is eternal separation from God. Just like any other relationship, we have free will to participate or not. That's probably not all that can be said on this but I'll stop here for now (so that I won't be the only one talking).
    I'm both super! ... and a doer!
  4. #1584  
    //obligatory noodley appendages

    .,;-#$^***^$#-;,.

  5.    #1585  
    Perhaps you can remind our readers (and me) who coined the "art" and the concept depicted in this (and similar) images?

    Quote Originally Posted by konsole View Post
    http://madeinhead.org/anism/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/flying-spaghetti-monster.jpg
    thanks in advance,
    --
    Bob
    I'm both super! ... and a doer!
  6. #1586  
    Quote Originally Posted by sudoer View Post
    Perhaps you can remind our readers (and me) who coined the "art" and the concept depicted in this (and similar) images?



    thanks in advance,
    --
    Bob
    root:wheel
    .,;-#$^***^$#-;,.

  7.    #1587  
    Quote Originally Posted by konsole View Post
    root:wheel
    Other than some "users" on Unix systems, I must apologize that I don't understand what you mean by the above comment.

    I was hoping perhaps that you would post a link to this WikiPedia article about the Flying Spaghetti Monster (and perhaps provide some "witnessing" as to how the FSM has improved your life!)
    I'm both super! ... and a doer!
  8. #1588  
    Quote Originally Posted by sudoer View Post
    Some quick responses (because I have to step out for a while):

    Unless it somehow gave us information that explains both his existence and purposes. (more on this later, I suspect)
    I'm not sure I follow.
    I'm not sure I'm willing to postulate that he would not know about time. If he exists and created a world which contains time, and he is "all knowing", it only seems logical to me that he would also know about time.
    Non sequitur. If such a being existed, it would have created 'time' and not necessarily bound by rules which 'we' are capable of understanding.
    As an Atheist,
    Who said I was an Atheist?
    you most certainly are bound by time.
    Define time.
    Are you somehow saying it's possible to not believe in God yet still have a soul? (If so, I'm interested in learning what you might have to say about that.)
    If a soul exists, it does so independently of what I believe or don't believe.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  9. #1589  
    Quote Originally Posted by sudoer View Post
    Other than some "users" on Unix systems, I must apologize that I don't understand what you mean by the above comment.

    I was hoping perhaps that you would post a link to this WikiPedia article about the Flying Spaghetti Monster (and perhaps provide some "witnessing" as to how the FSM has improved your life!)
    yeah I totally missed the opportunity to praise him...errr.. it... eh.. thing? it's definitely a noun.... praises be to the FSM and all the enlightenment it has brought everyone.
    .,;-#$^***^$#-;,.

  10.    #1590  
    If a soul exists, it does so independently of what I believe or don't believe.
    Agreed.

    Who said I was an Atheist?
    I'm not sure anyone did. My bad! Please feel free to share your religious affiliation/preference (if you have any).

    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by sudoer
    ...
    Unless it somehow gave us information that explains both
    his existence and purposes. (more on this later, I suspect)
    I'm not sure I follow.
    I believe that the God who a purport exists gave us the means to know and understand Him in the Bible and the Church. Perhaps you might see this as a circular argument. In science, we start with a hypothesis and test it to see whether our "guess" supports any given possible understanding. My assertion (in this thread and in life) is that I haven't yet been able to debunk this viewpoint, so I've given it more credibility as a possibility.

    Non sequitur. If such a being existed, it would have created 'time' and not necessarily bound by rules which 'we' are capable of understanding.
    This time I don't understand what you are trying to say.

    Define time.
    Given your view (somewhere along the lines of "time is a perceptipon"), I'm not sure I would be able to find any definition that might satisfy you. Perhaps you and I exist but were not meant to communicate and understand each other?

    If you feel differently, I'm willing to try and bridge the gaps between each of our understandings of life.
    I'm both super! ... and a doer!
  11.    #1591  
    Quote Originally Posted by konsole View Post
    yeah I totally missed the opportunity to praise him...errr.. it... eh.. thing? it's definitely a noun.... praises be to the FSM and all the enlightenment it has brought everyone.
    Why would you praise something that is invisible and undetectable?
    I'm both super! ... and a doer!
  12. #1592  
    Quote Originally Posted by sudoer View Post
    I'm not sure anyone did.
    Except for you?
    My bad! Please feel free to share your religious affiliation/preference (if you have any).
    I am an ordained minister in the Universal Life Church. I am also an agnostic. I am a Tobolgist.
    I believe that the God who a purport exists gave us the means to know and understand Him in the Bible and the Church.
    Which version of the Bible? Which version of the Church?
    Perhaps you might see this as a circular argument.
    Somewhat, but that's really not related to my point.
    In science, we start with a hypothesis and test it to see whether our "guess" supports any given possible understanding. My assertion (in this thread and in life) is that I haven't yet been able to debunk this viewpoint, so I've given it more credibility as a possibility.
    Except that for a hypothesis to be scientific, you need to be able to test it. You also must be willing to find out that you are wrong. It must be falsifiable, or it is simply a belief. How do you test your hypothesis?
    This time I don't understand what you are trying to say.
    If I am a Supreme Being and decide to create something, I don't need to know about anything. I can make it whatever I want to. I am also not bound to have predictable or consistent rules in that system. I will make a platypus just to toy with you.
    Given your view (somewhere along the lines of "time is a perceptipon"), I'm not sure I would be able to find any definition that might satisfy you. Perhaps you and I exist but were not meant to communicate and understand each other?
    Cop out.
    If you feel differently, I'm willing to try and bridge the gaps between each of our understandings of life.
    The answer is simple: 42.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  13. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #1593  
    Quote Originally Posted by sudoer View Post
    I'd go as far as to say "as long as we are human, there will be war".
    Being human is so much more than that.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  14.    #1594  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Being human is so much more than that.
    Certainly!
    I'm both super! ... and a doer!
  15.    #1595  
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    Except for you?
    I mistakenly was thinking that you were an atheist. I guess that means that I (minimally) implied it. I tried to go back and correct myself (perhaps not well). I'll reiterate that I made a false assumption. It wasn't a prejudgment, simply a mistake.

    I am an ordained minister in the Universal Life Church. I am also an agnostic. I am a Tobolgist.
    • Are you willing to share more (perhaps a link) to your church?
    • What was your ordination process like? (Just curious. PM me if you would rather keeo that private.)
    • What's a Tobolgist?


    Which version of the Bible?
    I think it is difficult to look at a single translation of the Bible and be able to assure its meaning with certainty. I tend to read many versions when studying. When just reading I don't worry highly about which version until I see something "new" and want to dig deeper.

    Which version of the Church?
    Christianity 1.0

    ... for a hypothesis to be scientific, you need to be able to test it.
    Agreed.

    How do you test your hypothesis?
    First I guess we have to state the hypothesis. We sort of have done this already, but briefly - my hypothesis is that God left us divine revelation that tells us things he wants us to know (that we would not know otherwise except for his telling us).

    I test this by finding a Church who claims to have authority to both define and interpret the Bible, and then I wait a few thousand years for them to prove themselves wrong. If they aren't proven wrong (and the book explains the purpose of things better than anything else), I'm willing to believe that Church's assertion that the book is inspired (and what they say it is).

    It must be falsifiable, or it is simply a belief.
    Clearly the Bible alone (with everyone interpreting it as they wish) seems to be the "fail" that you are looking for.

    If I am a Supreme Being and decide to create something, I don't need to know about anything. I can make it whatever I want to. I am also not bound to have predictable or consistent rules in that system. I will make a platypus just to toy with you.
    The above book (and the Church behind it) say that this God is "all knowing". If you can prove otherwise, then maybe we can debunk this "church".

    You also must be willing to find out that you are wrong.
    I'm in total agreement with you on this point.

    Cop out.
    I didn't mean to "cop out" from your question about "define[ing] time". I really didn't see the purpose. If you can explain why this is important, I will try and work with you.

    The answer is simple: 42.
    I've always liked that answer!
    I'm both super! ... and a doer!
  16. #1596  
    Quote Originally Posted by sudoer View Post
    I mistakenly was thinking that you were an atheist. I guess that means that I (minimally) implied it. I tried to go back and correct myself (perhaps not well). I'll reiterate that I made a false assumption. It wasn't a prejudgment, simply a mistake.
    I'm having a hard time believing that you're being serious here.
    I think it is difficult to look at a single translation of the Bible and be able to assure its meaning with certainty.
    But you think by averaging it out, you might get there?
    Christianity 1.0
    Unless you studied with Jesus, this is impossible.
    First I guess we have to state the hypothesis. We sort of have done this already, but briefly - my hypothesis is that God left us divine revelation that tells us things he wants us to know (that we would not know otherwise except for his telling us).
    That's not a very good hypothesis.
    I test this by finding a Church who claims to have authority to both define and interpret the Bible, and then I wait a few thousand years for them to prove themselves wrong. If they aren't proven wrong (and the book explains the purpose of things better than anything else), I'm willing to believe that Church's assertion that the book is inspired (and what they say it is).
    That's not a very good test. Can you prove the followers of the FSM are wrong? If you can't, the FSM obviously must be the one true god. Are your results able to be verified independently?
    Clearly the Bible alone (with everyone interpreting it as they wish) seems to be the "fail" that you are looking for.
    No, it's not. From a scientific perspective, you have to have a test where you could define 'pass' or 'fail'. If your only test is what happens after you die, you are making a farce out of your attempt at 'science'.
    The above book (and the Church behind it) say that this God is "all knowing". If you can prove otherwise, then maybe we can debunk this "church".
    Do you have a link to the Church of Christianity 1.0's website?
    I didn't mean to "cop out" from your question about "define[ing] time".
    That's not the cop out I'm referring to. I'm referring more to skirting an issue by just saying we 'were not meant to communicate and understand each other'.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  17. #1597  
    Unreasonable Faith: A reasonable blog on atheism, religion, science, and skepticism

    Not sure if anyone has mentioned this site but it has some fairly comprehensive discussions of religion in the forums that are definitely worth reading at length, as well as some interesting articles on the main site.

    There's my two cents, enjoy.
  18. #1598  
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadavis08 View Post
    And neither myself or any other person including God has to prove anything to anyone. just ask jesus to come into your heart if you want to know if he is real . you have to look for and seek him truly with your heart. not in the aspect of trying to prove anything because the condition of your heart and the reasons you search will determine what you find.
    well, i have to say, at least in my case, and i am an atheist, through and through, both times i was clobbered with avalanches, and was without a heart beat, nor was i breathing when they dug me out, did i call out to your god or your jesus. The third time i got clobbered, by another avalanche, i still did not yell out or even whisper those words, actually it was aaawwww shiet not again.. in the 2nd one, i lost five friends, and no, i still do not believe in that god thing or any of its related stuff.

    but that is just me, lol
    Life is short, Play hard, and enjoy every moment as if it was your last.
  19. #1599  
    UMMM i gotta ask,, is there anything in your lil book(s) about ice ages?? I dont recall anything.. nothing at all.. but perhaps I missed a sunday when i was a kid,, I was probabaly out skiing down some mountain in the rockies instead of going to sunday school..
    Life is short, Play hard, and enjoy every moment as if it was your last.
  20.    #1600  
    @Toby, First let me say that I believe the conversation between you and me might be fruitful (to me at least).

    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    I'm having a hard time believing that you're being serious here.
    I'm not sure what I need to do to convince you. (I'm human and subject to making mistakes.) I make more mistakes than the average person. Luckily I learn from (at least some of) those mistakes!

    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    But you think by averaging it out, you might get there?
    I wouldn't call "looking at all the possible evidence" before drawing conclusions "averaging it out". I'm neither a bible scholar or a linguist. If I understood Latin, I'd probably read the Latin Vulgate. If I new Greekm Hebrew, or Aramaic, I'd probably want to read earlier resources. Reading multiple translations helps to see what various scholars (often each with their own "agenda") think the translation should be. I've compared some passages in various translations with the Greek (interlinear - it shows each word and I can click on each word to get a definition in English). More often than I would have expected, the Greek is substantially different and *all* of the (English) translations more or less agree with each other. (One could argue "both ways" whether this is a good or a bad thing.)

    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    Unless you studied with Jesus, this is impossible.
    The church of Christianity 1.0 studied with Jesus. They call this a "deposit of faith" that must always remain true. There can be no new (public) revelation after the time of the death of the last Apostle.

    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    That's not a very good hypothesis.
    I'm not sure how one can call one hypothesis good or bad. Please feel free to explain what criteria you use to evaluate hypotheses (other than testing them via the scientific method). If you have nothing other than use of the scientific method, I'll just ignore your comment and focus on whether or not the "test" is good.

    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    That's not a very good test.
    It definitely has it's limits. It borrows from scientific principles as much as it can. If I understand correctly, the scientific method was invented by the Church. (I'm not sure of the circumstances behind why - or how it was used.)

    That said, I'd venture to argue that if the revelation provided by this Church and its Bible stand the test of time, that's really no different than how we test any other hypothesis. (I'm not sure I fully understand your point about how a test needs to have a "fail" case. Do Newton's laws fail (yes)? Does this reduce the utility of the Laws in furthering our knowledge of our environment (no)? Please feel free to elaborate what you mean so I can understand what you are trying to say. Sorry if you feel like I'm being dense!)

    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    Can you prove the followers of the FSM are wrong? If you can't, the FSM obviously must be the one true god. Are your results able to be verified independently?
    I've noticed a lot of inconsistencies behind this belief system (so far, in the short time that I've surveyed it). I don't know if I can prove it wrong or not. I haven't really studied it (and I haven't really tried to prove it wrong, or not). I'm happy to learn more about it from you.

    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    No, it's not. From a scientific perspective, you have to have a test where you could define 'pass' or 'fail'. If your only test is what happens after you die, you are making a farce out of your attempt at 'science'.
    I think I need to think about this and do some more study about what you are saying.

    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    Do you have a link to the Church of Christianity 1.0's website?
    Yes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    That's not the cop out I'm referring to. I'm referring more to skirting an issue by just saying we 'were not meant to communicate and understand each other'.
    I'm sorry, that does seem like a cop-out. Sometimes I'm lazy. You are right that we should attempt to communicate and understand each other. (That's the purpose of this thread - and I'd fail to do otherwise.) thanks

    --
    Bob
    I'm both super! ... and a doer!

Posting Permissions