Do you follow a religion

[OceanDude]

Originally posted by Snake_Eyes



...You're rapidly showing the limits of your thought processes. Confining one's self to any limited viewpoint is a pre-requisite for ignorance.

...in typical narrow-minded pseudo-Christian fashion, you're throwing out the baby with the bath water.

... and yes, the God of the Bible is a liar and a sadist

... But as per the ignorance of those unable to comprehend anything but a vengeful God in the sky, that knowledge was suppressed.

...And even then, you're still trying to pin me as being "bad" for espousing "a religion from the perspective of the snake in the Garden of Eden."

...So if it means I agree with the snake/Lucifer, then so be it. Right is right, regardless of brainwashing.

...Frankly the idea is a lot more reasonable and acceptable to me than a judgmental asshole that wants to sit in the sky and tell me how bad I am when he created billions of people to suffer for eternity.


...I've learned to accept such behavior from the followers of theistic religions. There's no rational basis for that belief, other than the rampant socialization involved....in other words, do what you're told and don't think outside of that context.

....but things are not so poorly designed that a sadistic madman is at the wheel.

....and you're showing the fallacy of your belief by getting angry at someone asking questions.

Snake_Eyes, every sophomoric, petty and trite argument that you have made is rather amateurishly but consistently crafted to the purpose of provoking an emotional response. You come across as almost jealous or hateful of the concept of a Christian God or have some kind of paranoia about religious ???conspiracies??? in general. But I suspect it???s more simply the case that you probably just hunger for attention and greatly desire to force a dialog and rebuttal in much the same way a child misbehaves with its parents to get their attention. You would do better in this regard to work on your style some. There is really no point in further dialog with you since: 1) I have no interest in ???selling??? you anything, and 2) You are not ???buying??? anything (is being an intellectual pauper with no apparent ability to buy or sell synonymous with ???narrow mindedness????) and 3) You have not yet demonstrated any evidence of intellectual or spiritual insight on the subject and 4) You seem hell bent on arguing for the sake of arguing and 5) You already have all your own answers and 6) I have no time to waste nor any interest in administering spankings. Your discourses are shot full of two-dimensional and shallow deception, deceit and insincerity. More sophistication is needed. Frankly you bore me. If you can change your style and say something intelligent or demonstrate some other form of enlightenment I may choose to enjoin further adult dialog with you in the future. In the interim, trust me, I am not at all ???upset??? or ???angry??? or ???provoked??? ??? just slightly annoyed by your lack of style and really just plain bored silly on my end. You are certainly entitled to your opinion but you will get much higher quality responses and meaningful dialog from people if you try less to provoke and more to encourage two-way adult dialog.

 

[Pepper]

Well said, OceanDude

 

[kuso]

I hope that reply didn`t take you 84 minutes to write lol

 

[Snake_Eyes]

So be it then. If you're willing to engage in the very behaviors you're accusing me of, then there's no room to discuss this matter any further.

 

[Tboy]

Originally posted by Nigeepoo
Why does everything have to be "truth" or "lies"? If someone says something that you believe to be incorrect, do you call them a liar, or do you state that you believe them to be incorrect?

Isn't being incorrect the same as not being true? And not being true is also false? aka a lie.

1) Are you saying that everything in the bible is correct?

Yes everything is true.

2) How many times has the bible been translated and re-translated?

A few. http://www.carm.org/evidence/rewritten.htm

3) Is it possible that there may be mis-interpretation of words in the bible?

http://www.carm.org/evidence/rewritten.htm

4) Is it possible that the people who created revision 1.0 of the bible got some facts wrong?

Possibly a couple of words but not facts.

Ok since I have jumped in here, I am a Christian also. I go to a Pentecostal church. I have stayed out of this thread to avoid getting into a lengthy typing match with some, but this seems like it has been a civilized thread.

So far there have been some really good points made. I would like to add one.

Being a Christian means being Christ like. Which in turn means following the rules set forth by God in the bible. It means at a minimum following the ten commandments to it's fullest, and then some, Such as living by the bible and following it's plan for having an eternal life in heaven.

In order for any of this to be believable you must first, believe the bible as a whole and not take a verse here or chapters there and then use that as a basis for your "religion".

 

[Arnold]

Originally posted by Tboy
Yes everything is true.

Really? How do you know?

 

[OceanDude]

Originally posted by Nigeepoo
quote:
Why does everything have to be "truth" or "lies"? If someone says something that you believe to be incorrect, do you call them a liar, or do you state that you believe them to be incorrect?

Originally posted by Tboy
Isn't being incorrect the same as not being true? And not being true is also false? aka a lie.

I must agree with Nigeepoo on his rhetorical question. Pragmatically, few if any things within human perception can be known and experienced perfectly as truth. For humans most things are simply approximate models of truth to greater or lesser degree that serve our fundamental needs. Some other things are just blatantly incorrect misunderstandings propagated maliciously (a true lie) or through carelessness as truth when they're really conjecture. In the scientific community there is even a precise mathematical expression for this in many equations called ???epsilon??? ??? or statistical ???uncertainty??? or ???error???. In theology it???s the age old concept of ???imperfection of man??? raising its ugly head. To tie it into this discussion the notion of ???epsilon??? or ???uncertainty??? is metaphorically similar to the Athenians "statue of the unknown god" that the apostle Paul spoke so eloquently of. The Greeks, being fairly intellectually advanced essentially pre-admitted to human fallibility but had the cleverness to ???cover their bases??? religiously (for fear of slighting any god they were unaware of). Back to ???uncertainty???. Many scientists will assert that this is a built in ???reality??? to all Science since humans can never fully observe something without actually effecting or changing it???s state or outcome. This stems from Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principal . This principal basically dooms all human attempts at perfect ???god like??? understanding of the physical universe to utter folly. This small but extremely important principal has in fact given rise to all manner of theological and spiritual linkage in Science. In a manner of speaking it scientifically proves that there is fundamentally built into all of existence an unsolvable Mystery that strongly suggests (if not proves) to me anyway ??? a higher authority or being. We see this when dealing with things at the sub-atomic level where anti-matter and matter can simultaneously create itself to ???balance the equations of man??? and then just as suddenly self annihilate as we try to observe it. Now this phenomenon even emerges at the large scale cosmological/planetary level of observation. There are in fact those that argue that nothing is physically present unless there is an observer to precipitate an ???event??? which spontaneously brings into existence a physical thing or effect through this principal. In a manner of speaking, through uncertainty Science has ???found??? a basis for religion with profound implications that exist in every single particle of matter and being in the Universe.

So unfortunately I must concede his argument here - knowing full well in advance what this leads to in a religious discussion. This is the fallacy of logic and debate and why I personally do not put all my ???faith??? in these methodologies. We simply can not expect to gain perfect knowledge or truth from discussing anything from an imperfect set of beliefs or observations. However, I think it???s perfectly accurate to deduce that ???inaccuracy??? becomes a lie when it is purposely perpetuated as truth when it is known a-priori to be blatantly false or unsubstantiated conjecture. In the end I believe we all are faced with accepting any point as a matter of faith; even all scientific argument.

In fact, I posit that nothing perceived from the human dimension is absolute truth (assuming for the moment that such a thing exists) since our human perceptions are so extremely limited and subject to built in biases and imperfect abstract models. Even in mathematical & scientific areas of study in which there is a great expectation for pure objective truth we always fall well short of absolute truth. We can never perfectly ???model??? our theories and discoveries in ways that are consistently true in a unifying way against competing theories and discovered facts in adjacent areas of existance.

 

[Robboe]

Originally posted by OceanDude
Snake_Eyes, every sophomoric, petty and trite argument that you have made is rather amateurishly but consistently crafted to the purpose of provoking an emotional response. You come across as almost jealous or hateful of the concept of a Christian God or have some kind of paranoia about religious ???conspiracies??? in general. But I suspect it???s more simply the case that you probably just hunger for attention and greatly desire to force a dialog and rebuttal in much the same way a child misbehaves with its parents to get their attention. You would do better in this regard to work on your style some. There is really no point in further dialog with you since: 1) I have no interest in ???selling??? you anything, and 2) You are not ???buying??? anything (is being an intellectual pauper with no apparent ability to buy or sell synonymous with ???narrow mindedness????) and 3) You have not yet demonstrated any evidence of intellectual or spiritual insight on the subject and 4) You seem hell bent on arguing for the sake of arguing and 5) You already have all your own answers and 6) I have no time to waste nor any interest in administering spankings. Your discourses are shot full of two-dimensional and shallow deception, deceit and insincerity. More sophistication is needed. Frankly you bore me. If you can change your style and say something intelligent or demonstrate some other form of enlightenment I may choose to enjoin further adult dialog with you in the future. In the interim, trust me, I am not at all ???upset??? or ???angry??? or ???provoked??? ??? just slightly annoyed by your lack of style and really just plain bored silly on my end. You are certainly entitled to your opinion but you will get much higher quality responses and meaningful dialog from people if you try less to provoke and more to encourage two-way adult dialog.

Well, you sure told him...

Also, i find it ironic that he bores you, when pretty much every post of yours i've read has been over-stretched, drawn-out, dull near-novel length paragraphs.

 

[Arnold]

LOL

now you're sticking up for ole Snake Boy, huh?

 

[Tboy]

Originally posted by Prince
Really? How do you know?

Because I believe.

How do you know otherwise?



You say that you don't follow a "religion".... ( I have asked you this before) Have you ever just got down on your knee's and prayed to be shown some insight to all this? And I mean more than a two line prayer. Do it when no one else is around if you foolish about doing it.

This would also apply to anyone else with unanswered questions.

 

[Tboy]

Originally posted by The_Chicken_Daddy
Well, you sure told him...

Also, i find it ironic that he bores you, when pretty much every post of yours i've read has been over-stretched, drawn-out, dull near-novel length paragraphs.

I have caught flak in the past for doing this, but I agree with TCD.

The point of the post seems to loose itself after about five or ten lines of reading.

 

[Tboy]

Originally posted by Prince
Really? How do you know?

It has also been proven to be true on many ocassions, some of it in the past few years.

 

[OceanDude]

Originally posted by The_Chicken_Daddy
Also, i find it ironic that he bores you, when pretty much every post of yours i've read has been over-stretched, drawn-out, dull near-novel length paragraphs.

TCD, in prior posts I have admitted to occasional long windedness; such is needed when there is a lack of familiarity with another???s context and level of common understanding. Here I can only say that some are more efficient at boredom than others. But given your recent 722 word diatribe and admonishment to DeMayor and your present admission that you have suffered my laborious words to great length, it would seem that irony likes to dance in pairs while flirting with hypocrisy. Although you could really do me no greater compliment than suffer me thusly I find it somewhat sadistic that you would only whine as a proxy for another at the end of the dance. Alas, it is perhaps in great suffering that humor finds it???s greatest perfection ??? and you sir are a precious work in that regard.

 

[Arnold]

Originally posted by Tboy
Because I believe.

How do you know otherwise?

Okay, you have faith and choose to believe, BUT that is quite different than knowing that it's true or factual.

I do not know otherwise, nor would I be so riteous to say that I did, which is exactly what Christians do.

Maybe there is a god, maybe there is not, I cannot prove there is not, and you certainly cannot prove that there is.

 

[Tboy]

Originally posted by Prince
Maybe there is a god, maybe there is not, I cannot prove there is not, and you certainly cannot prove that there is.

On the contrary, I have seen the result of prayer. I have seen people that have been healed because of prayer, aka miracles. True miracles, the ones that doctors on.

 

[Arnold]

yeah, me too on those tv shows, it's hilarious.

even if I agreed that those "miracles" were true (which we all know it's a load of crap), but for the sake of this argument...that still does would prove anything.

BUT, even if that did prove that maybe there is a higher power, it still would not prove that the bible is true.

 

[Tboy]

Originally posted by Prince
yeah, me too on those tv shows, it's hilarious.

It's truly a shame what "TV evangelists" does the reputation of "real" Christians.

even if I agreed that those "miracles" were true (which we all know it's a load of crap), but for the sake of this argument...that still does would prove anything.

Are you telling me what I have seen and heard with my own eyes and ears is not true? I'm not talking about the hocus pocus stuff you see on tv where the "preacher" goes to pray for someone then pushes them down as they pretend to faint.

BUT, even if that did prove that maybe there is a higher power, it still would not prove that the bible is true.

How so? If I can prove that God exists through miracles and actual events that were predicted in the Bible are true...

Look, You really don't know me that well nor I you. But You should know me well enough to know that I would not try to feed you a bunch of lies. I'm not like that. I also understand that some people have trouble in just believing. They need something tangible, so it's harder for some. I was born and raised believing in the Bible. So it's easy for me. I did take the time as I got older to find things out for myself.

I'll refer back to a statement I made a couple of posts up, You don't have to believe me. Try it for yourself.


p.s.

We seem to single each other out on these things for some reason

 

[OceanDude]

Originally posted by Tboy
...Are you telling me what I have seen and heard with my own eyes and ears is not true? I'm not talking about the hocus pocus stuff you see on tv where the "preacher" goes to pray for someone then pushes them down as they pretend to faint.

Tboy, just a very few simple and brief ideas for you to consider that may make your arguments more effective: From the perspective of a person who ???does not believe in the Bible??? (whatever that means since there generally is no scholarly debate denying the authenticity of the writings) and does not personally know you ??? your personal stories have probably less weight to others than do those in the Bible; assuming they have read any part of it (which is usually where most are bluffing from lacking any knowledge therein). In the Bible at least there was a consistent progression through a multitude of literary styles of history, poetry, prophesy and instruction written across many generations and penned by many separate human authors; all from different backgrounds, tribes and geopolitical motivations. There were just too many different people with different agenda in the authorship chain for it to have been any kind of plausible pan-generational religious conspiracy. In fact Christ really messed up the Zelot movement of the Jews when he came along (ref. Judas). What is generally not known to many however is that the Roman???s have a separate written and preserved record by a very important and well known Jewish historian named Josephus Flavious. We find Christ mentioned in his external writings numerous times: "Pilate condemned Him to be crucified and to die" and His disciples "reported that He had appeared to them three days after His crucifixion and that He was alive." I do not have the precise quote handy but he recorded in a separate Roman document sometime after the crucifixion along the lines of ???... surely this was the Christus that was foretold of.??? As a Jew and under the employment of the Romans as a Historian Josephus was not exactly a benevolent agent for Christians ??? so we can certainly trust things that he says that support Biblical references. The authenticity of history thus established and separately ratified from a hostile external source then reduces all arguments down to nothing more than a question of deity rather than history. This is where I would focus. Just some ideas...(sory to wax long)

 

[Snake_Eyes]

The Muslims and the Hindu say the same things.

What makes this any more right?

On a side note, about that obsequious passage demuring to scientific theory.....please, please don't just start throwing out chunks of quantum mechanical theory without understanding the context. That paragraph made me cringe with its mis-use of science.

 

[naturaltan]

... and 6 pages later it's still going on.

 

[OceanDude]

Originally posted by Snake_Eyes
???On a side note, about that obsequious passage demuring to scientific theory.....please, please don't just start throwing out chunks of quantum mechanical theory without understanding the context. That paragraph made me cringe with its mis-use of science.

I would suppose that you are referring to my post and reference to Hesenberg???s Uncertainty Principal. I assure you that as a Scientist I can speak with some weight on this principal; even though I do not fully subscribe to the full gambit of quantum mechanic thought (actually, I am currently more aligned to ???String Theory???). Given the prior complaint about the tedious nature of some of my posts I was compelled somewhat toward reasonable attempts at common consideration to be as brief as possible. Given the complexity of the topic there was much to consider but little pragmatic accommodation for complete dialog. Unfortunately, it is the nature of these kinds of discussion threads where we have a wildly diverse and heterogeneous level of educational exposure among participants that one must often risk being incomplete for the intellectual comfort of the uninitiated. My idea was to only present a short concept with appropriate linkage for further investigation to those interested parties without going into elaborate detail. This principal could be an entire discussion thread onto itself. So, unless you can speak with equal or greater understanding in this area I would suggest you learn to cope with whatever it is you find unsettling or start a new discussion thread so we can continue and not overly distract the others. But you still need to work on that attacking style???

 

[Snake_Eyes]

I'll speak as I wish. Save yourself the energy of trying to appear as if you're not "attacking" or are somehow above this debate as well. You've still yet to address any point I've made and have only resorted to whining and deflecting, and yet somehow seem to try and elevate yourself to some holier-than-thou position.

Spare me. And in that spirit,

"Better than a thousand pointless words is one saying to the point" - Buddha

If you feel so inclined to write your convoluted diatribes, look into the concepts of cohesion and brevity. In other words, make a point and don't just waste space. It'd be much more impressive.

At any rate.

If you wish to expound on Heisenberg's principle, the processes of entanglement and non-locality, Schrodinger's wave function, chromodynamics, or any other sub-discipline of quantum theory, I'm more than capable of discussing it on any level you choose. The same goes for string theory in any of its incarnations as well as M-theory.

Back to the original point. The uncertainty principle does not apply to macroscopic phenomena. Nor does the wave function. Quantum mechanics, as should be obviously implied by its name, relates only to sub-atomic phenomena.

"Observer-dependent" is a misnomer. The wave function exists in the absence of interaction with other wave-particle systems. This cannot apply to the macro level as there is never a point in which an object is not interacting with another.

Using such theory as a basis for religious thought is bad, bad science, and in any event only makes the God of the Bible appear less and less likely.

If you know as much as you claim about string theory, and a comparative knowledge of human psychology and biology, you'd likely understand that a God that has similar motives and drives to a human, even assuming that a creator exists, is highly, highly unlikely.

To say otherwise is to imply that the human mind is somehow patterned after a 10 (or more) dimensional structure of hopeless complexity. Again making for bad science.

I'm sure I'll be greeted by another paragraph devoid of content and full of big words that will somehow serve to side-step the valid points I made and make me look like a vicious attacker. But that's the nature of these debates. If you can't have your beliefs challenged, don't try to claim them as infallible on a public forum.

 

[Snake_Eyes]

They're just as sure as you are though, and can quote just as many passages from their holy books as you can.

So I ask again, what makes you more right?

 

[Tboy]

Originally posted by Snake_Eyes
They're just as sure as you are though, and can quote just as many passages from their holy books as you can.

So I ask again, what makes you more right?

If you are trying to make the comparison of muslims to Christians.... There is none.

mohamad was an illiterate, spastic, pedophile (yes there is proof of it) that worshiped the moon god allah. A muslim believes it is perfectly fine to kill a non believer of there faith.

 

[Tboy]

Originally posted by Snake_Eyes
They're just as sure as you are though, and can quote just as many passages from their holy books as you can.

So I ask again, what makes you more right?

Also even the quran quotes the bible and admits that Jesus walked the earth and rose from the grave.

 

[Robboe]

Originally posted by Tboy
mohamad was an illiterate, spastic, pedophile (yes there is proof of it) that worshiped the moon god allah. A muslim believes it is perfectly fine to kill a non believer of there faith.

Funniest post of the thread, this is.

 

[Tboy]

Originally posted by The_Chicken_Daddy
Funniest post of the thread, this is.

Glad I could humor you. But its true none the less.

 

[Robboe]

As true and funny as it was, it doesn't cease your earlier post:

Originally posted by Tboy
Because I believe.

...From being retardedly spanktastical.

 

[Tboy]

Originally posted by The_Chicken_Daddy
As true and funny as it was, it doesn't cease your earlier post:



...From being retardedly spanktastical.

As long as you got the point of the post, is all that matters.

 

[Snake_Eyes]

Originally posted by Tboy
If you are trying to make the comparison of muslims to Christians.... There is none.

mohamad was an illiterate, spastic, pedophile (yes there is proof of it) that worshiped the moon god allah. A muslim believes it is perfectly fine to kill a non believer of there faith.

Allah is the same God that Christians follow.

Now, what are you feelings about the Hindu religion? Or how about Buddhism for that matter?