Why god(s) why?

[Bronium 512]

It's not okay. Yet the real problem isn't the belief as much as it's the ignorance surrounding these issues. And before anyone points this out, I too sometimes is not knowing of some things, so forgive me if I make mistakes. I'm only human.

 

The reason why I suspect people will allow such travesty to go on isn't as much as why is it okay as to their lack of understanding.

God is a simple explanation, Abiogensis , for some, isn't. For some evolution may seem illogical.

 

This can be attributed to:

1) A lack of understanding of the subject.

2) A lack of wanting to understand the subject.

 

So people just choose the most simple (in their eyes) option and choose God. The same idea can be applied to this topic. Some just do not understand that what these people are doing is simply exploiting them. So they fall for it.

 

(This is not a generalization of any group in particular, just those that do not understand the concept, which is a lot of people.)

 

Also, it's a cop out. Some just want to evade these harsh realities and decide that they want to simply not care, and believe what they're elders say is true. That they're whole life isn't wrong. So they just blindly follow ignoring what is in front of them.

 

Humanity as a whole doesn't accept these things. None of it's okay. We just choose to turn a blind eye to religion as it's the easier option.

 

I'm fairly sure this is on topic XD

[Strife 455]

 

 

I wish to keep this discussion civil, so count to ten before posting if you feel upset about the topic please =)

This question has to it more facets than the obvious first glance might imply. And today I pose an another facet than the obvious.

For ages before Christianity mankind already had gods for everything under the sun, and usually one that was the sun. These unnecessary creations used to claim authority over knowledge of the world around us have given us nothing a community without gods would not have offered, except perhaps some unnecessary persecution and other grief.

People have tried to appease gods with sacrifices and tribute, with prayers and wars, murder as well as acts of kindness, but it has never resulted to anything better, no gods of the old, when forgotten have become enraged and wiped out mankind, no gods when insulted by infidels have come to their own defense, and nor will they ever.

Killing a goat didn't make it rain, dancing and hollering didn't make it rain, praying for month on end didn't make it rain any faster. And when it finally does, as it is inevitable on a planet mostly covered in water, these poor individuals then think that all those sacrifices paid off, art of ignorance at work.

Gods do not add to our understanding of the world around us, they only complicate things as then you have to make the excuses for them as "god(s) work in mysterious ways" when it is nothing but coincidental nature. Tragic thing is that these same people who seek clarity and guidance usually only get to their hard lives only more things to spend resources on, more confusion as the "answer" given is just arbitrary un-affected nature with an imaginary friend "controlling it".

So why people go with this "God" explanation so eagerly? It is rather easy thing to explain, we are social animals, and it gives a sense of empowerment to people when they think that with the help of others they can try to negotiate against the forces of nature. And then even with failure, to them it is just a poor negotiation where you win some or lose some, despite results being the same every time: random.

When finally the chance gives them a break, they think "god is good", only enforcing their observation bias unwittingly.

So in the end it is rather sad to see people wasting their resources, act violently in fear of God, or act violently in defense of their own delusion, or act violently under the guise of holy war when they are but puppets in the hands of some greedy individuals who can't get along. All those good people, who could do good things together as a community pitted against each others over small silly things that someone's overly complex piece of fiction got differently than some other persons fiction.

It's like Star Wars fans declaring jihad on Trekkies. Literally. And that doesn't happen because those two fictions do not claim any authority. Only difference there is the claim to authority.

However in the end, sci-fi like Star Trek works as a better guide to life even than most religions, with is prime directive and other lessons. Funny how several thousand years of culture and development in art and fiction gives us better fiction huh?

 

I only see two things to this post (to summarize).

• Humans are stupid.

• Claims that Religion is false.

I can certainly agree that humans are stupid, no doubt about that. However, you cannot make such an entirely biased thread claiming that Religion is false and untrue when you simply cannot know for sure if you're even correct.

 

The problem isn't Religion. The problem is that people need to grow the hell up and stop trying to kill each other over everything.

 

But honestly, that's not the real reason, is it? Religion (and in these Modern times "terrorism") is simply an excuse used by the country's leaders. It's ignorant to think that Religion is the cause ... because it isn't.

 

The real problem is Greed. Behind every crusade or act of cleansing is simply a greedy leader(s) that wants more land, wealth, and power.

 

Edit: grammatical errors

Edited June 15, 2012 by Strife

[Sheogorath 1,155]

I only see two things to this post (to summarize).

• Humans are stupid.

• Claims that Religion is false.

I can certainly agree that humans are stupid, no doubt about that. However, you cannot make such an entirely biased thread claiming that Religion is false and untrue when you simply cannot know for sure if you're even correct.

 

The problem isn't Religion. The problem is that people need to grow the hell up and stop trying to kill each other over everything.

 

But honestly, that's not the real reason, is it? Religion (and in these Modern times "terrorism") is simply an excuse used by the country's leaders. It's ignorant to think that Religion is the cause ... because it isn't.

 

The real problem is Greed. Behind every crusade or act of cleansing is simply a greedy leader(s) that wants more land, wealth, and power.

 

Edit: grammatical errors

 

Religion when institutionalized always leads to abuse of power, claims of authority and greed.

[Marcusaralius76 150]

I think our ancestors created religion as a way of explaining what happened after death. If I recall from history class, the first religions had no gods, and the same final fate for everyone. Gods were only created when unexplained events occurred, such as a mountain bursting into flames, or a plague.

 

For the most part, Modern religion is very different from what it used to be. After what several people call the "charismatic movement," many religious followers began to use religion as a moral guideline and look at a deity as an idea rather than a wrathful divine figure. Some still follow the older ways and over-complicate certain situations because they strongly believe in their god. And the fact is that, because their is no real way to prove or disprove religion, their beliefs will not likely change any time soon.

[Mersander 55]

It's because people have to understand everything. Don't know the creation of man? Must be a god. People are designed to cling on to something when theres no proof. Sometimes, things aren't meant to be discovered. But yet, our human race continues to keep searching. Where have we gotten? creating idols that drag us further into a questioning abyss?

[Killian Jones 2,655]

Religion when institutionalized always leads to abuse of power, claims of authority and greed.

 

I would like to add to that that most religions don't really feature a benevolent God. In fact, you should probably fear this entity as it will do the most horrible things when you don't listen. And more importantly, that humans are inherently evil. Especially Christianity and Catholicism does this well. What it creates is the widespread belief that you are allowed to do bad things, because you have justification for being "evil". And people who are believers will only do good, simply not to face the wrath of this creature.

 

I am of the personal opinion that such thinking is downright wrong and opens another can of worms in terms of morality. The biggest problems with sexuality, gender and race equality comes from this evil versus good that is ingrained into the teachings of many religions.

[Lady Rarity Pony 4,892]

Especially Christianity and Catholicism does this well. What it creates is the widespread belief that you are allowed to do bad things, because you have justification for being "evil". And people who are believers will only do good, simply not to face the wrath of this creature. yadayadayada

 

Excellent straw man argument.

 

Catholicism doesn't teach that. Stop assuming what Catholicism teaches and actually get it right before you use it to try to scrutinize someone's beliefs on morality.

 

There is no taught "justification" for being evil in Catholicism and all mainstream Christianity. There may be a defined reason for evil's existence but it's not a justification. In fact, there is no justification for committing evil in Christianity.

 

Your second point is just as erroneous as the first. We are not taught to avoid evil not because there may be some sort of eternal punishment for us but because it's an act of betrayal to God whom we are suppose to have a personal relationship with. It's out of love that we are suppose to avoid evil, not out of fear of eternal damnation.

 

Stop misrepresenting Christianity and Catholicism with loads of bullshit like this.

[Killian Jones 2,655]

Excellent straw man argument.

 

Catholicism doesn't teach that. Stop assuming what Catholicism teaches and actually get it right before you use it to try to scrutinize someone's beliefs on morality.

 

There is no taught "justification" for being evil in Catholicism and all mainstream Christianity. There may be a defined reason for evil's existence but it's not a justification. In fact, there is no justification for committing evil in Christianity.

 

Your second point is just as erroneous as the first. We are not taught to avoid evil not because there may be some sort of eternal punishment for us but because it's an act of betrayal to God whom we are suppose to have a personal relationship with. It's out of love that we are suppose to avoid evil, not out of fear of eternal damnation.

 

Stop misrepresenting Christianity and Catholicism with loads of bullshit like this.

 

Then why are sins hereditary and do we actually all start off as sinners, according to both Catholicism and Christianity? Considering sinning is a bad thing within the Catholicism and Christianity, it is seen as evil.

 

And there is no way around it either, the dichotomy brought on by the church and it's teaching present the world in clear black and white, in good and evil, and no shades of gray, all of my dealings with it have led me to see this is a widely used concept. It is in fact one of the morals which is at a subconscious level brought on. And I am under that impression myself. Many Christians and Catholics do practice this belief. The best example may have come from George W Bush, who pretty much said it to the world, either with, or against, there is no neutral.

 

And quite honestly, it is an idea that appals me and leaves a very bad taste in my mouth, because it clearly shows that there is a large group out there who think I am evil and a bad person based on their own belief, without needing to know me, they can pass that judgement. Especially the die hard ones out there.

[Lady Rarity Pony 4,892]

Then why are sins hereditary and do we actually all start off as sinners, according to both Catholicism and Christianity? Considering sinning is a bad thing within the Catholicism and Christianity, it is seen as evil.

 

And there is no way around it either, the dichotomy brought on by the church and it's teaching present the world in clear black and white, in good and evil, and no shades of gray, all of my dealings with it have led me to see this is a widely used concept. It is in fact one of the morals which is at a subconscious level brought on. And I am under that impression myself. Many Christians and Catholics do practice this belief. The best example may have come from George W Bush, who pretty much said it to the world, either with, or against, there is no neutral.

 

And quite honestly, it is an idea that appals me and leaves a very bad taste in my mouth, because it clearly shows that there is a large group out there who think I am evil and a bad person based on their own belief, without needing to know me, they can pass that judgement. Especially the die hard ones out there.

 

Hahaha!

 

Christians worship Jesus Christ, not George Bush. Bush can say whatever the hell he wants. He does not define Christian teaching.

 

Maybe you'd like to hear an argument that has just about the same credibility as yours?

The argument that atheists have no defined morals therefore can do whatever they want and have no reason to feal bad for any action.

 

Haha, and you use a straw man argument to call Christian morals appalling!

 

If you consider your accusations credible, then you'd have to accept the above accusation, because they are both loads of bullshit based off nothing more than someone's bias assumptions. ;D

 

Then why are sins hereditary and do we actually all start off as sinners, according to both Catholicism and Christianity? Considering sinning is a bad thing within the Catholicism and Christianity, it is seen as evil.

 

Oh and look, another straw man argument! I'd love to stay here and lecture you on the doctrine of Original Sin but I think you'd best do it on your own.

 

Stop using the impression you're under as a means of spreading lies about people and their thinking.

[Bronium 512]

Catholicism doesn't teach that. Stop assuming what Catholicism teaches and actually get it right before you use it to try to scrutinize someone's beliefs on morality.

 

There is no taught "justification" for being evil in Catholicism and all mainstream Christianity. There may be a defined reason for evil's existence but it's not a justification. In fact, there is no justification for committing evil in Christianity.

 

Your second point is just as erroneous as the first. We are not taught to avoid evil not because there may be some sort of eternal punishment for us but because it's an act of betrayal to God whom we are suppose to have a personal relationship with. It's out of love that we are suppose to avoid evil, not out of fear of eternal damnation.

 

Let's try to remain civil guys? Okay? I mean everyone not just you LRP.

Yes, from your point of view it maybe that. But I mean it's blackmail. Hell is only there to say "Hey, if you don't do what I say, you're gonna go to hell." I mean, for you it may have been for love but for many former Christians it was a like the belt. It was a warning saying that you are gonna get punished for doing something against his will, which btw according to society these days, his morals aren't always the best.

I mean it's like me saying "You do what I say, be it bad or good, or I will bring you down to my torture chamber and make you feel pain for the rest of your life." You don't even know if that chamber exists. But if I act like I had enough authority, well you would be scared shitless into doing it. It has some effect on people. Don't think it doesn't. And from most stories from former Christians I've heard, this is what they felt.

And for the teaching part, there are pastors in churches who wave eternal damnation to convert non-Christians into Christians. Every church I've gone to has had these pastors. (Which I know isn't really evidence, but I just saying I'm not blindly making accusations.)

 

Though it is true that Christianity gives you no justification for evil. I don't know where he got that from.

 

Oh and LRP, do you think that the church teaches shades of gray? Maybe a few times. I can't remember exactly where though but the option may be open. The Bible is a book about morals. A maybe a book defining morals may fault itself in the fact by defining you are leaving no option for something being gray. It's either good or bad in the Bible and Tich chose George mostly because of shock value. I think.

Edited June 16, 2012 by Bronium

[Strife 455]

Let's try to remain civil guys? Okay? I mean everyone not just you LRP.

Yes, from your point of view it maybe that. But I mean it's blackmail. Hell is only there to say "Hey, if you don't do what I say, you're gonna go to hell." I mean, for you it may have been for love but for many former Christians it was a like the belt. It was a warning saying that you are gonna get punished for doing something against his will, which btw according to society these days, his morals aren't always the best.

I mean it's like me saying "You do what I say, be it bad or good, or I will bring you down to my torture chamber and make you feel pain for the rest of your life." You don't even know if that chamber exists. But if I act like I had enough authority, well you would be scared shitless into doing it. It has some effect on people. Don't think it doesn't. And from most stories from former Christians I've heard, this is what they felt.

And for the teaching part, there are pastors in churches who wave eternal damnation to convert non-Christians into Christians. Every church I've gone to has had these pastors. (Which I know isn't really evidence, but I just saying I'm not blindly making accusations.)

 

Though it is true that Christianity gives you no justification for evil. I don't know where he got that from.

 

Oh and LRP, do you think that the church teaches shades of gray? Maybe a few times. I can't remember exactly where though but the option may be open. The Bible is a book about morals. A maybe a book defining morals may fault itself in the fact by defining you are leaving no option for something being gray. It's either good or bad in the Bible and Tich chose George mostly because of shock value. I think.

 

This is all an incorrect misconception (although I've never heard of a correct misconception before, ha).

 

First of all, I would like to ask:

 

How many of the people here talking about Catholicism and Christianity have actually read the Bible? The entire thing?

 

I would bet that 98% of you have not. This would mean you are talking simply from your uninformed assumptions. This is only a guess of course, I could be wrong.

 

Now, with that out of the way ...

• Neither Catholicism nor Christianity ever give an excuse to commit a sin.
• Neither Catholicism nor Christianity ever say it is OK to commit a sin.
• The concept of Hell is not as punishment.

I'm sure you're all aware of the classic story regarding Adam and Eve. God told the couple to not take fruit from a specific tree. Satan, under guise of a snake, convinced Eve to do so anyway, also getting Adam into the action. With full knowledge, they both disobeyed God.

 

By listening to Satan, they inherited his imperfections, his Sin (Satan is the original Fallen Angel). The impressionable humans took in Sin willingly and so are marked with it eternally. That is (simplistically) the Original Sin. The story can further be examined to fully identify all of the Seven Deadly Sins which Adam and Eve took a part of.

 

Since, according to the Bible, we are in some way directly related to Adam and Eve, we share in their burdens. As a family, we are responsible for the actions of our ancestors. Their Sins have become ours. God gave humans a sense of free will and it is our duty for the love of our Maker to follow his wishes -- not unlike the duty of a child to listen to their father.

 

As for Hell ...

 

Hell is not a punishment, exactly. If you are to take the concepts of Heaven and Hell literally, then it's more of a crossroads (hence the term Crossroads Demon). You have the option to take a left, or to take a right. It is your choice. A choice you have to be responsible for.

 

The Ten Commandments are essentially instructions on how to gain admittance to Heaven. It is the pathway you must take to reach that destination ... the roads to travel.

 

Why isn't admittance free, you ask? According to the Bible, we turned our back on God ... not the other way around. He may be kind, but he isn't stupid.

 

Now, keep in mind I am by no means an expert on the Bible ... I just like to read various books of religion, it's extremely informative into how a culture works (and a great means to brush up on History).

 

Religion when institutionalized always leads to abuse of power, claims of authority and greed.

 

All of this happens regardless if Religion is institutionalized.

 

What a nice ad hoc statement there.

[Bronium 512]

Snips.

 

I never said that Christianity gives no justification or free pass to sin (whatever it considers to be sin. WHat is considered to be sin changes over time, so I don't know what you consider to be sin). I never said that. I actually said that the Christianity doesn't promote what it thinks sin is.

 

Now let's begin shall we?

 

1) I know about the creation story. Pretty much everyone here does. I'm not sure what everyone argues about, but how on earth can this be fair? Just because someone else does something stupid, why must we all suffer for it? It's frankly idiotic. It's like a story of a man gone mad with power. He does not just kill the man who has wronged him, but his family and his generations before him. That's sadistic in any context. I just want answers to how this is in anyway fair, beyond "the Bible says so." (This is not meant to offend, I just want an answers. ) I mean He immediately starts us off with Sin due to our ancestors. A baby that's just born has already the sins of his ancestors. What has this baby, by itself done? Nothing. But his dad's a dick, so the baby is also at fault. That's a ridiculous claim.

 

2) I don't know your definition of freedom, but the one your God provides certainly isn't my definition. The fact that he can interfere (for good and for bad) at his whim just reduces our freedom by a tonne. Also, the fact we need to redeem ourselves from our original sin is another way of reducing our freedom. And don't get me started on his "plan". (More answers please).

 

3) Let's talk about detention shall we? Detention isn't a punishment, exactly. You have the option to take a left (to go home) or to go right (to go to detention). It's your choice. A choice you shall be responsible for.

 

The school rules are essentially instructions on how to gain admittance to you home.

 

Why can't we go home even if we don't follow the rule, you ask? It's because we turned out back on society... society hasn't failed you. You just haven't passed the the tests to become one with society, so you have to go to detention, which we will force you to go. But remember it's still a choice. Just one you can't choose.

 

4) There are two ways I see it. God has to either be evil or stupid. I mean there are countless times where God was just sadistic. He even wrote a whole book about how evil he is (Job). And his morals would be considered just batshit insane in society these days. (This is God's book and any laws that are in the Bible as his laws. I mean, if he doesn't think that way of the laws in the Bible, he can easily just take em out. He's God.). Or he's stupid. He is blissfully unaware of his actions on us and cannot see how these actions affect others. And he doesn't even know his laws are immoral.

 

It's a bit unnerving really. But still. Also History Text books. They also speak of the culture and the history of the world, just without the bias and with more perspectives.

 

Edit: A part was a bit mean. So I took it out.

Edited June 16, 2012 by Bronium

[Strife 455]

I never said that Christianity gives no justification or free pass to sin (whatever it considers to be sin. WHat is considered to be sin changes over time, so I don't know what you consider to be sin). I never said that. I actually said that the Christianity doesn't promote what it thinks sin is.

 

Now let's begin shall we?

 

1) I know about the creation story. Pretty much everyone here does. I'm not sure what everyone argues about, but how on earth can this be fair? Just because someone else does something stupid, why must we all suffer for it? It's frankly idiotic. It's like a story of a man gone mad with power. He does not just kill the man who has wronged him, but his family and his generations before him. That's sadistic in any context. I just want answers to how this is in anyway fair, beyond "the Bible says so." (This is not meant to offend, I just want an answers. ) I mean He immediately starts us off with Sin due to our ancestors. A baby that's just born has already the sins of his ancestors. What has this baby, by itself done? Nothing. But his dad's a dick, so the baby is also at fault. That's a ridiculous claim.

 

2) I don't know your definition of freedom, but the one your God provides certainly isn't my definition. The fact that he can interfere (for good and for bad) at his whim just reduces our freedom by a tonne. Also, the fact we need to redeem ourselves from our original sin is another way of reducing our freedom. And don't get me started on his "plan". (More answers please).

 

3) Let's talk about detention shall we? Detention isn't a punishment, exactly. You have the option to take a left (to go home) or to go right (to go to detention). It's your choice. A choice you shall be responsible for.

 

The school rules are essentially instructions on how to gain admittance to you home.

 

Why can't we go home even if we don't follow the rule, you ask? It's because we turned out back on society... society hasn't failed you. You just haven't passed the the tests to become one with society, so you have to go to detention, which we will force you to go. But remember it's still a choice. Just one you can't choose.

 

4) There are two ways I see it. God has to either be evil or stupid. I mean there are countless times where God was just sadistic. He even wrote a whole book about how evil he is (Job). And his morals would be considered just batshit insane in society these days. (This is God's book and any laws that are in the Bible as his laws. I mean, if he doesn't think that way of the laws in the Bible, he can easily just take em out. He's God.). Or he's stupid. He is blissfully unaware of his actions on us and cannot see how these actions affect others. And he doesn't even know his laws are immoral.

 

Just one question. You have read the Bible, the whole entire thing. Even the sadistic parts, and thought to yourself, this is a moral, just God? Well, wow. I'm not trying to be mean, but I'm just surprised. It's a bit unnerving really. But still. Also History Text books. They also speak of the culture and the history of the world, just without the bias and with more perspectives.

 

Not even sure if I should attempt to counter-point due to your insane bias presented within your post.

 

Bah, what the hell, I like to bash my head into a brick wall expecting different results.

 

(1) One major flaw is that you assume that every single person is 100% unique and different from each other.

 

The second major flaw is that you assume the Bible is entirely literal.

 

Let me delve a wee bit into the second point first:

 

I find it safe to assert that no person will find the Bible to be 100% literal, even those that believe in it. I would also assert that most people would find it silly to believe in the Bible being 100% literal.

 

That said, remember that the Bible is theoretically thousands upon thousands of years old and gone through may reiterations and translations. Not only is it possible that the Bible has lost a significant amount of it's original content and meaning, but that would be expected.

 

First point now:

 

I rarely share this bit of information, but I feel I must.

 

I'm sure everyone here is familiar with the Theory of Evolution (the word "Theory" being important, btw). Many people are also familiar with the overall concept of a lot of religions.

 

Then most people make the false assumption that they are mutually exclusive.

 

The existence of one does not reject the existence of the other (for most religions). Example; It is possible that God created all we see around us. It is possible that humans (and other animals, plants, etc) are the by-product of Evolution. It is not only possible, but likely, that God would have been the one to implement this function of Evolution. As God's tool, essentially.

 

Now, keeping that in mind, Evolution is based in the fact that species share a common trait and 'evolve' to develop or lose traits.

 

Following this trail of thought, the concept of Sin can be a trait that Humanity obtained through a method of "evolution" (remember that evolution is to change, not specifically to get better). This makes the concept of Original Sin that everyone bears not only possible, but feasible.

 

Since this trait is common to all humans, it means that must work to rid ourselves of that trait. Think about the concept of Sin and it makes sense. Everyone is tempted by "Sin" (what we would call urges) and we need to work against those urges.

 

(2) You can do whatever you want, how is that not freedom? Like it is in science "For every action, there is an equal - an opposite - reaction." Everything you do will have a consequence (be it bad or good), but be assured in that fact that YOU got to make those choices.

 

Extreme example: People abducted your family and said that if you do not kill a certain person, they will kill your entire family instead. If you kill that person, you broke the law and will go to jail (but your family will be alive). If you do not kill that person, that person will be alive and you will not have broken the law (but your family is now dead).

 

Not extreme example: You're with a group of friends. They offer you some marijuana. If you smoke it, you're breaking the law (assume it's illegal in your state) and could get charged with a crime. If you do not smoke it, they will no longer be your friends.

 

In both those examples, there are positive and negative things about each choice. And while one choice may seem easier, you can still choose either choice.

 

Same thing applies to Heaven / Hell concept.

 

(3) The mistake is thinking in Hell as a punishment. That's false. Heaven is the reward for resisting Sin. Although this point is simply a matter of perspective (glass half full or half empty).

 

(4) See point (1). Also, just about all content in this 'point' of yours is entirely subjective.

 

Furthermore, standard history books are just as biased. History books are not written by the events, they are written by the winners. A fantastic example of this would be China. Their History books are funny to read.

 

Due to 'recent' things such as the Internet and mass networking, it's far easier to ensure that historical accounts remain more accurate, but anything created in later times cannot be considered 100% factual.

 

Example: in those days, it was easy for a King to declare that something was factual (when it wasn't) and all records would be changed to reflect whatever the King thinks. A ton of fantastic examples have cropped up over the years in Egyptian culture.

[Bronium 512]

Snip

 

1)I interpret the Bible as literal because it's the Word of your God. Why would a God write a book of morals in riddles? It's something to dedicate your life to. You don't write a maths book in riddles. That would be stupid. Another thing is that, the whole god damn book has to be either a moral story to guide a person or it has to be literal. I mean what if the creation story was not literal? What if Hell and Heaven wasn't literal. What if a shit tonne of stuff he'd done wasn't literal and was simply an analogy for something else? We can't know what the guy was thinking when he wrote the damn thing and I'm going to say, that if he wants to govern peoples lives, he's going to do it simply and not in circles. When have we the authority to decide what your God thinks? So please tell me, which verses of the Bible is literal and which verses of the Bible is not. Then tell me how you went about and decided that.

 

2) Why follow a half baked version of the word of God? You base your morals. You're principles on this book that could be all wrong. I mean, why not simply just decide upon your own morals through the rational thought of your own. Why do you need a book telling you what to think. And this isn't pertaining to the Bible as much as it's regarding anything. You can make the decisions yourself. Also how can you be sure of the history that's in the Bible? If you think the Bible has been changed, well it's no longer the word of God as it is the Word of Man.

 

3) I really hope you know that Theory means an explanation of a natural occurring phenomena. It in no way reduces the credibility of the the theory. Also, I'm not saying that evolution is the true explanation for the diversity of life. Just that a large amount of evidence supports it.

 

4) I'm not oblivious to the idea that many people believe in evolution and creationism. I can understand you're rationale. Abiogenesis did not occur and creation did and everything evolved from there. But I'll let this pass through. Now you cannot say that it is most likely though. You have no evidence for the idea that God is using Evolution. It is most likely had he existed. But you're statement that it is most likely that God created whatever you think he created and used evolution later is false. You have no objective proof that God exists and therefore cannot support your claim.

 

5) Actually evolution (through natural selection) is kinda supposed to improve the race as a whole. The bad traits die out and cannot pass on to the next generation. The good ones pass on. It is true that an organism's genome changes. But if the change is not beneficial to the survival of a species, the organism is less likely to mate and pass on the bad genes.

 

6) Also this original sin has nothing to do with Genetics. There is nothing to it. Ask any biologist this and they'll say no.

 

7) As we have cleared up that bad genes will eventually die out due to evolution (which is what you believe) and even so, original sin is not related to evolution (you're grasping for straws there buddy), our sin is not passed on by any biological means.

 

8) Therefore, it is not fair to tell a baby he has sinned if he has not. You don't give detention to a class because the class last year was a dick.

 

9)You're urges are biological. They are. You just think they are bad. To want to have sex? That's to pass on your genes. To want to eat more? To survive and store up food so in times of need one can survive. You just call them sins because of their morals. There are no sins. Not even murder is a sin. They are called bad and sinful only because of the principles of society. There is no defined bad or good. That's a man made creation. Now I'm not saying I'm without morals. I do believe that somethings people do are wrong, I just can accept that my morals are the morals of the universe.

 

10) It doesn't apply to the Heaven and Hell concept in which you applied it. I literally said "In this context". I was directly applying to what you said. And I didn't say we didn't have any freedom. We are restricted in the freedoms we are given. Also, in your examples, freedoms are taken away. It has been reduced. I mean in both examples, there are restrictions. That is the law. The law restricts your freedom. To be free is to do anything we god damn well please. You fear the law, so you won't do it (this doesn't happen in real life but it does in your example). Now I know that I have to trade my freedom for my safety and that's a decision that I made as I think it's a beneficial decision for me, but I'm not deluded into thinking what I have is true freedom. I only have a watered down version of it. You're God just restricts a whole bunch more, to the point where I cannot pretend it's freedom. The fact that he sets the laws down, is in itself choking my freedom. Now I understand this is a point of perspective. This is just my perspective.

 

Also, he can take your life at anytime. I mean look at the Book of Job.

11) It's both. Here's an example.

 

The parents set down a set of laws that is supposed to govern a child's life. If by 21 the child has lived by his parents rule, he gets a mansion. If he doesn't he gets whipped for the rest of his life living with his parents. You're saying that getting whipped is not a punishment and getting the mansion is the reward. The mansion is the reward BUT the whipping is the punishment. Hell is punishment and heaven is a reward.

 

12) I'm going to tell you a few stories here. Tell me what you think of the guy here.

 

-Making a bet with the devil that a guy (that was so perfect) was so nice that he wouldn't do shit if he hurt him. So he hurts him and then hurts him some more, just to prove a point. Meanwhile, he kills the rest of the family and cattle and servants. (I know it's technically Satan who did these things but God allowed it. Satan had to actually ask permission from God to do these things. The guy hadn't even done anything wrong, so God had no reason to do this)

This is the Book of Job.

-Killing a whole city, because everyone was evil. I mean, would you kill your kids, even if they murdered someone? This isn't a loving god. Not by a bit.

Sodom and Gomorrah.

-Killing a whole planet because everyone is bad. A planet full of humans and other creatures as well. I presume they weren't evil as well. - Noah's ark.

A whole god damn planet. Do you know how many people that is? And even if they are bad, what did all the animals do? Every single last one of em. And I don't even know why God would ask for two of every animal. They clearly can't reproduce a whole race again. That's just stupid.

 

And come on and tell me that's not evil. I want your perspective.

 

And History books are written by the winners, but it's a damn kilometer more accurate than any religious books. And I don't mean a single history text book, if you want to know more about history read a lot of them. They're focused on the culture and the history so they would be more well researched. I was saying this as a joke about how you got your history information for a book not focused on it. That's all.

[Strife 455]

1)I interpret the Bible as literal because it's the Word of your God. Why would a God write a book of morals in riddles? It's something to dedicate your life to. You don't write a maths book in riddles. That would be stupid. Another thing is that, the whole god damn book has to be either a moral story to guide a person or it has to be literal. I mean what if the creation story was not literal? What if Hell and Heaven wasn't literal. What if a shit tonne of stuff he'd done wasn't literal and was simply an analogy for something else? We can't know what the guy was thinking when he wrote the damn thing and I'm going to say, that if he wants to govern peoples lives, he's going to do it simply and not in circles. When have we the authority to decide what your God thinks? So please tell me, which verses of the Bible is literal and which verses of the Bible is not. Then tell me how you went about and decided that.

 

2) Why follow a half baked version of the word of God? You base your morals. You're principles on this book that could be all wrong. I mean, why not simply just decide upon your own morals through the rational thought of your own. Why do you need a book telling you what to think. And this isn't pertaining to the Bible as much as it's regarding anything. You can make the decisions yourself. Also how can you be sure of the history that's in the Bible? If you think the Bible has been changed, well it's no longer the word of God as it is the Word of Man.

 

3) I really hope you know that Theory means an explanation of a natural occurring phenomena. It in no way reduces the credibility of the the theory. Also, I'm not saying that evolution is the true explanation for the diversity of life. Just that a large amount of evidence supports it.

 

4) I'm not oblivious to the idea that many people believe in evolution and creationism. I can understand you're rationale. Abiogenesis did not occur and creation did and everything evolved from there. But I'll let this pass through. Now you cannot say that it is most likely though. You have no evidence for the idea that God is using Evolution. It is most likely had he existed. But you're statement that it is most likely that God created whatever you think he created and used evolution later is false. You have no objective proof that God exists and therefore cannot support your claim.

 

5) Actually evolution (through natural selection) is kinda supposed to improve the race as a whole. The bad traits die out and cannot pass on to the next generation. The good ones pass on. It is true that an organism's genome changes. But if the change is not beneficial to the survival of a species, the organism is less likely to mate and pass on the bad genes.

 

6) Also this original sin has nothing to do with Genetics. There is nothing to it. Ask any biologist this and they'll say no.

 

7) As we have cleared up that bad genes will eventually die out due to evolution (which is what you believe) and even so, original sin is not related to evolution (you're grasping for straws there buddy), our sin is not passed on by any biological means.

 

8) Therefore, it is not fair to tell a baby he has sinned if he has not. You don't give detention to a class because the class last year was a dick.

 

9)You're urges are biological. They are. You just think they are bad. To want to have sex? That's to pass on your genes. To want to eat more? To survive and store up food so in times of need one can survive. You just call them sins because of their morals. There are no sins. Not even murder is a sin. They are called bad and sinful only because of the principles of society. There is no defined bad or good. That's a man made creation. Now I'm not saying I'm without morals. I do believe that somethings people do are wrong, I just can accept that my morals are the morals of the universe.

 

10) It doesn't apply to the Heaven and Hell concept in which you applied it. I literally said "In this context". I was directly applying to what you said. And I didn't say we didn't have any freedom. We are restricted in the freedoms we are given. Also, in your examples, freedoms are taken away. It has been reduced. I mean in both examples, there are restrictions. That is the law. The law restricts your freedom. To be free is to do anything we god damn well please. You fear the law, so you won't do it (this doesn't happen in real life but it does in your example). Now I know that I have to trade my freedom for my safety and that's a decision that I made as I think it's a beneficial decision for me, but I'm not deluded into thinking what I have is true freedom. I only have a watered down version of it. You're God just restricts a whole bunch more, to the point where I cannot pretend it's freedom. The fact that he sets the laws down, is in itself choking my freedom. Now I understand this is a point of perspective. This is just my perspective.

 

Also, he can take your life at anytime. I mean look at the Book of Job.

11) It's both. Here's an example.

 

The parents set down a set of laws that is supposed to govern a child's life. If by 21 the child has lived by his parents rule, he gets a mansion. If he doesn't he gets whipped for the rest of his life living with his parents. You're saying that getting whipped is not a punishment and getting the mansion is the reward. The mansion is the reward BUT the whipping is the punishment. Hell is punishment and heaven is a reward.

 

12) I'm going to tell you a few stories here. Tell me what you think of the guy here.

 

-Making a bet with the devil that a guy (that was so perfect) was so nice that he wouldn't do shit if he hurt him. So he hurts him and then hurts him some more, just to prove a point. Meanwhile, he kills the rest of the family and cattle and servants. (I know it's technically Satan who did these things but God allowed it. Satan had to actually ask permission from God to do these things. The guy hadn't even done anything wrong, so God had no reason to do this)

This is the Book of Job.

-Killing a whole city, because everyone was evil. I mean, would you kill your kids, even if they murdered someone? This isn't a loving god. Not by a bit.

Sodom and Gomorrah.

-Killing a whole planet because everyone is bad. A planet full of humans and other creatures as well. I presume they weren't evil as well. - Noah's ark.

A whole god damn planet. Do you know how many people that is? And even if they are bad, what did all the animals do? Every single last one of em. And I don't even know why God would ask for two of every animal. They clearly can't reproduce a whole race again. That's just stupid.

 

And come on and tell me that's not evil. I want your perspective.

 

And History books are written by the winners, but it's a damn kilometer more accurate than any religious books. And I don't mean a single history text book, if you want to know more about history read a lot of them. They're focused on the culture and the history so they would be more well researched. I was saying this as a joke about how you got your history information for a book not focused on it. That's all.

 

(1)

Regardless of it's origin ...

And who wrote that book? A Human.

Who translated that book over and over and over? A human.

Who has lost pages and sections? A human.

 

I shouldn't have to explain anything beyond that.

 

(2)

That is essentially my point. While the Bible (or any religious text) can give some good insight in various aspects of life and history, it ultimately remains YOUR choice in what you will do.

 

(3)

A Scientific Theory is a widely-accepted hypothesis. Nothing more.

 

(4)

And you have no objective proof to say otherwise. But it would be logically sound to think that God created the tool of Evolution and used it (assuming both God and Evolution are real).

 

(5)

Incorrect. Evolution is the change of a species over time. Natural Selection is the concept that states that change will generally result in improvements.

 

(6 - 8)

You obviously missed the entire point. Furthermore, it CAN be theorized that there is biological backing to it (theorized, of course). The greater part of the human brain and human DNA are unmapped and unknown as to what they do.

 

How do you explain emotions? Big can of worms right there.

 

(9)

And biologically, can be explained via Evolution. Which is what the concept of Sin can be attributed to coming about. Also, explain such things as emotions (as the previous point asks).

 

(10)

You always have freedom. You can ALWAYS do whatever the hell you want. ALWAYS. You CHOOSE to do whatever action. You can literally do whatever you want. Consequences do exist, but that doesn't change the fact that you can go do whatever you want.

 

The pathetic excuse of "But that's illegal" doesn't change the fact that you CAN go do it. There are consequences, but you can do it.

 

(11)

As I said, matter of perspective. Learn to read please.

 

(12)

ALL subjective statements from you and gross half-assed (and incomplete) reiterations of the stories. Oh did I mention how grossly subjective that entire section was from you?

 

Doesn't even deserve a response.

 

 

 

Bottomline is that you refuse to believe in the possibility of something else existing beyond your perfect little box. I find it important to point out the fact that I have not once specified what I personally believe (Hint: It's nothing that's been discussed anywhere on these forums).

 

It takes quite a lot of effort bury your head from the sand, clear that tunnel vision, and accept the possibility that maybe - just maybe - your assertions are wrong. They could be all true, no doubt about that (we are dealing with a topic that has no verifiable evidence either way), but it could also be all wrong.

 

The Truth (if there really even is such a thing) could be NONE of this. It could be something entirely different. Something so obscure that Humans haven't even conceptualized it yet.

 

Hell, the existence of all things can be a moose in a room for all we know (reference) ... but we don't.

 

My energy is best spent elsewhere, so forgive if I decide to not respond further (although I might, who knows).

[Bronium 512]

Next time snip

 

1) They were inspired by God. I'm sure that God told them exactly what he wanted to say, so had there been no mistakes there would be no riddles. If you say that you're book is that weak now, well you lost your only point of arguing for your religion. I presume you're a Christian yes?

 

2) Didn't even answer my question. I cannot understand your rationale for why anyone would be a Christian.

 

3) A theory is by definition an explanation for a phenomena, that is supported by evidence. It just so happens that theories can be widely accepted.

 

4) You assume God and evolution is real.I have observed micro-evolution and have evidence to strongly support macro evolution. It is more probable that I am right and you are wrong. I can never be certain anything is what I say it is, and am open to that fact. You said that it is most likely yet it is not most likely. Your hypothesis is not the most likely candidate. If it was, then it would be accepted by many peer reviewed journals and accepted among the scientific community. That's what science is. Picking out the most likely candidate due to the evidence.

 

5) Yes and as you can clearly see. I wrote natural selection. Which is the most widely accepted theory.

 

6-8) Yes, indeed it can be theorized but you have no evidence for this. I assure you, that DNA (genes make up DNA) is instructions given to cells as to what they do and how they function. And even the 98% not used for protein coding is now recognized as giving rise to functional RNA molecules. So let's be serious now, you can't be serious when you say that there is A GENE specifically for The Original Sin, even though. You have no evidence for your claims. I do.

 

9)And mind you, evolution by your definition is species change over time and by your logic the original sin have changed as well? Don't pretend that something philosophical is biological. The Original Sin is an idea and is not coded directly into us. Also, how do you explain the differences in temperatures in metals, using the current metallic bonding model. Fairies. They use they're magic wands to change stuff around. Science isn't complete and you can't just insert you're beliefs into it.

 

10) I wrote a paragraph on why God doesn't give my definition of freedom. But you won't understand since, you don't know what I'm even talking about. Evidenced by you not understand what I'm talking about. Also, the fact that God can take my life as he sees fit is not freedom. You tell me how that's freedom.

 

11) It's not a matter of perspectives. That was what I was saying. You're word isn't the last word. A punishment is a punishment no matter what.

 

12) Okay, then please tell me how the story of Job isn't making God evil. And of course I said that it was subjective. I wanted to know how you could think that any of those stories, however you put it, was not evil. It's quite simple. In any context. How is killing a planet a good,just thing?

 

I don't. And if he exists and sends me to Hell, I'm glad. I'm glad that he did. Cause then I'll know he exists. Which is something I know and will not need to debate over. And by the way I don't need to know what you're belief is.

 

There is no evidence to point out his existence, therefore I see no need to believe in him..

 

I accept that my assertions could be wrong. I'd be happy if they were wrong. That's means that I'm not on the wrong track. Just that there is no proof of a God. We can no nothing for sure, but we can predict the probability of something happening. Which is what science is about. The degree of prediction accuracy. And there had to be a God or no God. Which is we are arguing about. There is no demi-god.

 

But I agree, there can be anything out there that explains the universe. It could be god, it could be laws of physics. It could be anything.

 

I know. I think I've said this before. Every thing we sense is how our brain perceives it. A chair could be a square but our brain perceives it as this complex looking shape. We cannot confirm anything ever. It's probably nothing. Where nothing exists.

 

Well, I bear no grudges. So adieu my amigo and the force be with you.

[Strife 455]

Well, I bear no grudges.

 

Nor do I.

 

We're just stuck in a circular argument that won't go anywhere, so no point to continue.

 

And no, I am not a Christian.

[Sheogorath 1,155]

And no, I am not a Christian.

 

More power to you Marvel Acolyte!

[I used to be a stranger 7,993]

This post has been redacted by the author.

Edited May 1, 2021 by Blue