billvon 2,400
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)
Recommended Posts
micro 0
Quote>It's simply an expression to try an explain the difficult
>concept that God, as Creator, is outside of time.
No, it's a way to try to justify biblical language stating the earth was created in 6 days - not epochs, not god-days, days. In 300 AD, that may have made sense. Now we know that's not true.
So people who believe that everything in the bible is 100% literally true have two choices:
1) Admit that perhaps the bible is more a metaphorical truth than a literal one
2) Redefine words (like "day") so they can claim that the bible is still 100% literally true.
What you're saying is true for strict fundies. The Catholic Church has never taught that the world was literally created in 6 24 hour periods. That would even be contradicting the text itself, since it isn't until "The Fourth Day" that God creates the lights in the day and the night to seperate the day and the night that would define a 24 hour period.
But what I said to kallend is not false either. That statement has been said to mean what I said.
I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...
Zenister 0
I'd be VERY careful about your use of 'never'
the catholic church HAS executed those who pointed out the there WERE NO crystalline spheres that composed the heavens..
prevailing Religions always like to forget inconvenient history or fundamental flaws in dogma and belief that were once taught as "facts". To do otherwise would erode their authority and control over the thoughtless masses.
everytime you come up with yet another silly justification for why the bible clearly mistates reality, you are cut by occam's razor
the catholic church HAS executed those who pointed out the there WERE NO crystalline spheres that composed the heavens..
prevailing Religions always like to forget inconvenient history or fundamental flaws in dogma and belief that were once taught as "facts". To do otherwise would erode their authority and control over the thoughtless masses.
everytime you come up with yet another silly justification for why the bible clearly mistates reality, you are cut by occam's razor
____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.
JackC 0
QuoteHow can you, me, or anyone else fully explain God?
Easy. The whole story, all the inconsistencies, all the redefining words, all the different interpretations, all the problems with literal and metaphorical readings, all the logical falacies, all the infinities, the problem of evil, the whole shebang, all of it makes complete, logical sense if you include this one tiny thing: god is a fictional character.
QuoteHe could have revealed more. Even if you had a categorized, numbered manual direct from God Himself, would it make a difference whether you want Him in your life or not?
If you could prove it was indeed direct from god, then yes.
JackC 0
QuoteQuoteI believe that Satan doesn't want anyone to believe in Christ's resurrection.
I believe the exact same thing. I think that annoys people though. It seems when someone expresses their religious beliefs, there are the bunch who for some reason have to debunk them...rather than just politely respect them.
If I believed that all people with X characteristic should be shot at birth, people wouldn't respect that. I'd be called a biggot.
If I believed that the voices were telling me to kidnap people and keep them in a hole in my basement, people wouldn't respect that. I'd be called crazy (amongst other things)
Yet somehow, believing in invisible gods and demons who influence lives and exist on some etherial plane is supposed to be respected? Because it's a religion?
Can anyone explain to me why?
Royd 0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Are you telling me that because science can't see, touch, or feel that something doesn't exist? That sounds like a statement of faith to me.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The problem with your statement is that you refuse to accept the possibility that there are realms that exist, which we humans simply cannot detect.
If something is true, even though we can't prove it, or if we adamantly deny it, doesn't make it any less true.
Do you believe that the heavens are endlessly full of universes?
We can't see that far, and the idea absolutely boggles the mind, yet, any reasonable person would say yes it is.
Are you telling me that because science can't see, touch, or feel that something doesn't exist? That sounds like a statement of faith to me.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, by that statement, you believe by faith that we are the most intelligent beings in the universe?QuoteScience is the best method of human enquiry yet developed. Science doesn't exist in the abstract. Science doesn't do anything by itself.
If humans cannot detect something using the best methods available to humans, then for all practical purposes it doesn't exist.
The problem with your statement is that you refuse to accept the possibility that there are realms that exist, which we humans simply cannot detect.
If something is true, even though we can't prove it, or if we adamantly deny it, doesn't make it any less true.
Do you believe that the heavens are endlessly full of universes?
We can't see that far, and the idea absolutely boggles the mind, yet, any reasonable person would say yes it is.
JackC 0
Royd 0
Do you believe that the heavens are endlessly full of universes?
We can't see that far, and the idea absolutely boggles the mind, yet, any reasonable person would say yes it is.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
At least, that's what us Earthlings call it.
We can't see that far, and the idea absolutely boggles the mind, yet, any reasonable person would say yes it is.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What's your point? The earth is in a solar system. The solar system is in a universe, which is the Milky Way, if I recall my earth science.Quotehint
At least, that's what us Earthlings call it.
JackC 0
Quote]What's your point? The earth is in a solar system. The solar system is in a universe, which is the Milky Way, if I recall my earth science.
Your astronomy needs a refresher course I think.
Follow the link and read the very first definition of universe.
kallend 1,625
QuoteDo you believe that the heavens are endlessly full of universes?
We can't see that far, and the idea absolutely boggles the mind, yet, any reasonable person would say yes it is.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------What's your point? The earth is in a solar system. The solar system is in a universe, which is the Milky Way, if I recall my earth science.Quotehint
At least, that's what us Earthlings call it.
You might take the time to find out what science tells us before trying to debunk it.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
Zenister 0
QuoteQuoteHow can you, me, or anyone else fully explain the Biblical God?
Easy. The whole Biblical story, all the inconsistencies, all the redefining words, all the different interpretations, all the problems with literal and metaphorical readings, all the logical falacies, all the infinities, the problem of evil, the whole shebang, all of it makes complete, logical sense if you include this one tiny thing: god is a fictional character.QuoteHe could have revealed more. Even if you had a categorized, numbered manual direct from God Himself, would it make a difference whether you want Him in your life or not?
If you could prove it was indeed direct from god, then yes.
Emphasis added.
Believers tend to forget that what they have is a TEXT. A very edited TEXT. One obtained ENTIRELY from clearly biased sources.
what that TEXT claims about "God" is not really "God" in any shape or form (which if you can show me God in any "way, shape or form", clearly, without bias, identify as such, I'd be very interested. i always have been.)
Belief is something more than the TEXT it is based on. The TEXT simply provides the means to justify the Social Structure and Ritual. Cultural Religion is a means of social control. Most believers have never seriously examined the TEXT the forms the basis of their Religion in the first place. Quite a few more have developed some even sillier textual "apologies" for why the TEXT is so obtuse and erroneous in face of modern Science.
but Belief is based on something else. What one Believes is based in WHAT THEY HAVE BEEN TAUGHT BY AUTHORITY and WHAT THEY HAVE DECIDED TO ACCEPT AS TRUE (ie "Faith")
it is a socializing process. one each individual has to overcome (or not)
few socialized humans 'evolve' spiritually. it requires pushing oneself far outside the realm of possibilities of Comfort. At a basic level "Faith" is only explained by the individual statement "I find COMFORT in this Belief". That feeling of Comfort is significantly stronger when continually reenforced by a Structured Social Ritual.
____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.
JackC 0
QuoteQuoteQuoteHow can you, me, or anyone else fully explain the Biblical God?
Easy. The whole Biblical story, all the inconsistencies, all the redefining words, all the different interpretations, all the problems with literal and metaphorical readings, all the logical falacies, all the infinities, the problem of evil, the whole shebang, all of it makes complete, logical sense if you include this one tiny thing: god is a fictional character.
Emphasis added.
Yep, my mistake although it works for the scripture of every religion I'm aware of.
the problem with claiming the bible book is the infallible word of god(borg) is that every holy book ever written makes the same claim. they were all WRITTEN BY MEN.
and now a little prayer, GOD PROTECT ME FROM YOUR FOLLOWERS
and now a little prayer, GOD PROTECT ME FROM YOUR FOLLOWERS
we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively
wishers never choose, choosers never wish
wishers never choose, choosers never wish
Muenkel 0
QuoteI believe that Satan doesn't want anyone to believe in Christ's resurrection.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I believe the exact same thing. I think that annoys people though. It seems when someone expresses their religious beliefs, there are the bunch who for some reason have to debunk them...rather than just politely respect them.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If I believed that all people with X characteristic should be shot at birth, people wouldn't respect that. I'd be called a biggot.
If I believed that the voices were telling me to kidnap people and keep them in a hole in my basement, people wouldn't respect that. I'd be called crazy (amongst other things)
Yet somehow, believing in invisible gods and demons who influence lives and exist on some etherial plane is supposed to be respected? Because it's a religion?
Can anyone explain to me why?
Sorry, I was a little vague. I think you misunderstood my use of the word 'them' up above. I meant to say that you don't have to believe what someone else believes, but why not atleast respect the person and accept that they have a different set of beliefs. I see consistently in this forum, attemtps to make people feel like jerks just because someone disagrees with their particular religion.
Chris
_________________________________________
Chris
From what I've seen, it isn't that people are trying to make other people feel like jerks for what they believe. It's that people are upset and angry that the religious beliefs of another person are influencing the way they live their life.
Certain Christians upset me, because:
I don't want to have to homeschool my kids in the future because creationism is being taught as science. I'll teach them about it myself as a religions or sociology lesson.
I don't want my twelve year old cousin to have to carry a child to term because she was a victim of a violent rape.
I don't want to see people denied life-saving or life altering treatments because there is a very slim chance that there might maybe be some small damage to the embryo that provided the stem cells, and that chance isn't any greater than the chance of injury when doing routine genetic testing on an embryo.
If there were people that were trying to tell me I had to wear a burka and pray to mecca five times a day, I'd be pretty pissed off at them also. However, the religion that is having the most profound affect on american politics today is christianity, and I've found that the effects are extraordinarily negative. And yes, that's my opinion. I recognize that some people are very happy when the state forces twelve year old girls to have their rapist's baby. I'm just not one of them.
Certain Christians upset me, because:
I don't want to have to homeschool my kids in the future because creationism is being taught as science. I'll teach them about it myself as a religions or sociology lesson.
I don't want my twelve year old cousin to have to carry a child to term because she was a victim of a violent rape.
I don't want to see people denied life-saving or life altering treatments because there is a very slim chance that there might maybe be some small damage to the embryo that provided the stem cells, and that chance isn't any greater than the chance of injury when doing routine genetic testing on an embryo.
If there were people that were trying to tell me I had to wear a burka and pray to mecca five times a day, I'd be pretty pissed off at them also. However, the religion that is having the most profound affect on american politics today is christianity, and I've found that the effects are extraordinarily negative. And yes, that's my opinion. I recognize that some people are very happy when the state forces twelve year old girls to have their rapist's baby. I'm just not one of them.
kallend 1,625
An excellent summation.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
religion causes the problems, not solving them.
mitakuye oyasin means we are all related. stop emphasing differences and the people of planet earth will not need any form of control(religion, government, race, sexual orientation, gender, etc.) to get along.
Rescuing the bible from fundamentalism.
John Shelby Spong ISBN 0-06-067518-7
his mistake is that he ASS-u-mes jesus is a historical character(proven not). Also, that a christian theocracy is somehow good when other theocracies are not.
jesusneverexisted.com is well worth reading, no matter how badly you want to cling to the myth.
mitakuye oyasin means we are all related. stop emphasing differences and the people of planet earth will not need any form of control(religion, government, race, sexual orientation, gender, etc.) to get along.
Rescuing the bible from fundamentalism.
John Shelby Spong ISBN 0-06-067518-7
his mistake is that he ASS-u-mes jesus is a historical character(proven not). Also, that a christian theocracy is somehow good when other theocracies are not.
jesusneverexisted.com is well worth reading, no matter how badly you want to cling to the myth.
we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively
wishers never choose, choosers never wish
wishers never choose, choosers never wish
micro 0
QuoteI don't want my twelve year old cousin to have to carry a child to term because she was a victim of a violent rape.
I don't want to see people denied life-saving or life altering treatments because there is a very slim chance that there might maybe be some small damage to the embryo that provided the stem cells, and that chance isn't any greater than the chance of injury when doing routine genetic testing on an embryo.
In one sentence it's a child. The next sentence it's an embryo.
I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...
Lindsey 0
In one sentence it's a child. The next sentence it's an embryo.
Yeah...makes sense to me. Early in development it's an embryo. It develops into a child. :)
linz
--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail
What lindsey said.
I can see what you're saying, however:
I don't want my kids to go to a school that tells them they evolved from monkeys, and therefore have no purpose because they weren't "created."
I don't want my kids to be exposed to raunchy billboards, pornography on tv and movies, obscene gestures, etc.
I don't want my kids to be taught by society that it's okay to murder an unbaby, simply because "it's not the right time to have one."
You say that Christianity has a "negative effect" on society, but I don't like living in a society that promotes pretty much anything and everything against what the Bible preaches.
Mother to the cutest little thing in the world...
I don't want my kids to go to a school that tells them they evolved from monkeys, and therefore have no purpose because they weren't "created."
I don't want my kids to be exposed to raunchy billboards, pornography on tv and movies, obscene gestures, etc.
I don't want my kids to be taught by society that it's okay to murder an unbaby, simply because "it's not the right time to have one."
You say that Christianity has a "negative effect" on society, but I don't like living in a society that promotes pretty much anything and everything against what the Bible preaches.
Mother to the cutest little thing in the world...
The kind of society you describe is contradictory to the first amendment of the US constitution.
Why not take the situations you describe and use them to teach your child?
When a child's school teaches actual scientific theories you think are wrong, use the opportunity to present any evidence you may think is contradictory. I oppose teaching creationism in science class because it isn't science. I do, however, believe it should be (and often is) taught in a religions or sociology class.
When you see a billboard you don't like, explain that you don't agree with the message, and why not. Tell your child why you think it's disrespectful to the people in the billboard, and why, and ask him/her what she thinks. Use the opportunity to open a dialogue. I don't believe in telling someone else that they can't say or do something I disagree with. It isn't my decision.
I'm not sure what you mean by "unbaby" other than it's not a baby at that time, which it isn't. I agree with you. I don't believe abortion is the right choice in most situations, and I would never have one myself except to save my own life (and in that case, I'd call it self defense). However, I recognize that it isn't my right to make that decision for someone else, because I don't walk in their shoes and I don't live their life. They could be facing medical or emotional difficulties that I'm unaware of, and it simply isn't my place to make a decision like that for them.
If you disagree, you can talk to your child about why, about what makes people choose abortion, and why you disagree with those choices. You can also use the opportunity to tell your daughter that if she becomes pregnant that you will do everything you can to support her, won't be angry, will be disappointed, but really, truly want her to come talk to you before making any decisions. Same conversation for a son regarding a girlfriend.
Society is always going to behave in ways you don't agree with, simply because people don't agree with you. I think the main difference between us is that I want to allow other people to make their own choices, while you want to decide for them along the lines of what your faith teaches. I don't have any problem at all with you allowing your faith to guide your life, or about you teaching your faith to others. I don't like it when you presume to make choices for other people. It is your place to teach. It is not your place to force.
Why not take the situations you describe and use them to teach your child?
When a child's school teaches actual scientific theories you think are wrong, use the opportunity to present any evidence you may think is contradictory. I oppose teaching creationism in science class because it isn't science. I do, however, believe it should be (and often is) taught in a religions or sociology class.
When you see a billboard you don't like, explain that you don't agree with the message, and why not. Tell your child why you think it's disrespectful to the people in the billboard, and why, and ask him/her what she thinks. Use the opportunity to open a dialogue. I don't believe in telling someone else that they can't say or do something I disagree with. It isn't my decision.
Quote
I don't want my kids to be taught by society that it's okay to murder an unbaby, simply because "it's not the right time to have one.
I'm not sure what you mean by "unbaby" other than it's not a baby at that time, which it isn't. I agree with you. I don't believe abortion is the right choice in most situations, and I would never have one myself except to save my own life (and in that case, I'd call it self defense). However, I recognize that it isn't my right to make that decision for someone else, because I don't walk in their shoes and I don't live their life. They could be facing medical or emotional difficulties that I'm unaware of, and it simply isn't my place to make a decision like that for them.
If you disagree, you can talk to your child about why, about what makes people choose abortion, and why you disagree with those choices. You can also use the opportunity to tell your daughter that if she becomes pregnant that you will do everything you can to support her, won't be angry, will be disappointed, but really, truly want her to come talk to you before making any decisions. Same conversation for a son regarding a girlfriend.
Society is always going to behave in ways you don't agree with, simply because people don't agree with you. I think the main difference between us is that I want to allow other people to make their own choices, while you want to decide for them along the lines of what your faith teaches. I don't have any problem at all with you allowing your faith to guide your life, or about you teaching your faith to others. I don't like it when you presume to make choices for other people. It is your place to teach. It is not your place to force.
>concept that God, as Creator, is outside of time.
No, it's a way to try to justify biblical language stating the earth was created in 6 days - not epochs, not god-days, days. In 300 AD, that may have made sense. Now we know that's not true.
So people who believe that everything in the bible is 100% literally true have two choices:
1) Admit that perhaps the bible is more a metaphorical truth than a literal one
2) Redefine words (like "day") so they can claim that the bible is still 100% literally true.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites