UCFKevin Posted February 29, 2004 Posted February 29, 2004 Dyer, I made like ONE such comment, to the best of my memory, and that was a while ago. If you're one to hold grudges, so be it, but c'mon, it's not like it was a blatant lie or anything, it DOES happen, what I joked about. If it offended you, sorry, but that's how it is. You can either dwell on it or move past it. And anyone who buys into the Atkins diet or this whole USA crazy "low carbs" BS is a fool. Anyone seen that Last Temptation of Christ movie? I've heard only good things about it, but I also hear it's somewhat controversial? I saw Passion of the Christ yesterday. Hell of a good movie. I love the message. Just love people. Everyone. That's something I can very easily stand behind. Or at least strive for. Moimeme, I just asked out of curiousity. I've never really heard much about the Old Testament, hence my question. No ulterior motives there.....
moimeme Posted February 29, 2004 Posted February 29, 2004 Didn't think there were ulterior motives - just surprised you didn't know! I love the message. Just love people. Everyone There you go. And you know what? Do a study of all the world's religions. Boil them down to their basic tenets. Every single one of them, at its root, can be distilled to two rules: 1 - believe that there is a Something greater than you and 2 - be good to your fellow humans Which says to me that those are two absolute truths we can believe in. How we carry it out is immaterial; but that one is 'religious' won't necessarily mean that one is operating by either or both of those tenets, unfortunately.
dyermaker Posted February 29, 2004 Posted February 29, 2004 Kevin, it wasn't the assertion that such misconduct existed, but the implication that there was a doctrine permitting it, which is why I suggested you should actually read the Catechism. As for the ulterior motives behind the Old Testament question, you'll have to forgive us, as it's a common question used to attack religion, because of the more barbaric laws and punishments. It's followed closely by "Do Catholics Worship Mary?" How we carry it out is immaterial; but that one is 'religious' won't necessarily mean that one is operating by either or both of those tenets, unfortunately. This is the sad truth. I saw some cheerful christians waving signs outside SF City Hall that read "God Hates Fags"
UCFKevin Posted February 29, 2004 Posted February 29, 2004 And that certainly doesn't help the case against my arguments. But I know there are plenty of good religious people out there. I gotta try to focus on that and remember that rather than thinking they're all bigoted morons with archaic beliefs. I can't stand it when someone says or does something REALLY awful and reprehensible and then says, "Oh, I'm a sinner, God will forgive me," which basically gives them free reign to do what they want. I know a few folks like that.
Arabess Posted February 29, 2004 Posted February 29, 2004 Smoove, I've found that as long as you are happy with YOUR God and what he represents.....then it works for you. I happen to think you and I share the same one.
dyermaker Posted February 29, 2004 Posted February 29, 2004 Kevin, once again, I empathize and understand your contempt for certain religious people. I objected to your guesswork as to the doctrine of their religion. Religion is divine, religious people are human--that's my belief.
lattimershotgun Posted February 29, 2004 Posted February 29, 2004 god is bull**** and so is religion, come on guys. it is the stupidest **** ever. I guess some people can believe in a god.. thats fine. but when someone is super ignorant and take everything from teh bible to be true word for word. then i write them off as a ****ing moron.. jsut my two cents.
dyermaker Posted March 1, 2004 Posted March 1, 2004 Originally posted by lattimershotgun god is bull**** and so is religion, come on guys. it is the stupidest **** ever. I guess some people can believe in a god.. thats fine. but when someone is super ignorant and take everything from teh bible to be true word for word. then i write them off as a ****ing moron.. jsut my two cents. Clearly you have avoided ignorance.
lattimershotgun Posted March 1, 2004 Posted March 1, 2004 ya i relize i jsut typed the **** out fast and messed up teh spelling of everything. i was just giving an opinion like both of you guys did. i respect all of you, u guys helped me with my problems with my ex. but i don't see how anyone can beleive in something u cant actually witness. thats all but regardless, i wasnt trying to put you guys down or anything. later people
dyermaker Posted March 1, 2004 Posted March 1, 2004 Originally posted by lattimershotgun ya i relize i jsut typed the **** out fast and messed up teh spelling of everything. i was just giving an opinion like both of you guys did. i respect all of you, u guys helped me with my problems with my ex. but i don't see how anyone can beleive in something u cant actually witness. thats all but regardless, i wasnt trying to put you guys down or anything. later people Do you believe in love?
jenny Posted March 1, 2004 Posted March 1, 2004 lattimershotgun and others, there are a number of resources that can help you to be an educated and well-spoken atheist. i enjoy the thought and the idea of god, but i am still more or less an agnostic at the moment, and it troubles me when i see fellow atheists and agnostics not using the logic, rationality, and civility that we could have so much access to. here are a couple of excellent introductory resources: a book called beach blanket atheism, and a fantastic website at: http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/ this web site will go through a huge number of religious fallacies, and counter each one with classical logic. an ex-member of this site, ryan, was the strongest atheist i have ever seen. his arguments were undefeated on this forum, so you may want to scroll through his posts as well to see how it is done. paul also has an excellent post that uses santa as an analogy, and elvis is a good one as well. i will dig up his post later. cheers and happy debating! p.s. you will see this on ryan's post - but the most important thing to remember is that the burden of proof is always on the believer, and it does not really harm you if other people choose to believe that santa exists.
Darkangelism Posted March 1, 2004 Posted March 1, 2004 I have two issues with religion, one where is the proof that anything is correct and two how come so many people kill each other over religion? I mean its like I hate you because some guy who died 600 years ago tells me that what some other guy who died 5000 years ago is wrong
dyermaker Posted March 1, 2004 Posted March 1, 2004 Originally posted by Darkangelism I have two issues with religion, one where is the proof that anything is correct and two how come so many people kill each other over religion? I mean its like I hate you because some guy who died 600 years ago tells me that what some other guy who died 5000 years ago is wrong Where is the proof that love exists? (not rhetorical, answer that) Where is the proof that you exist? That I do? I think, therefore, I am. God works, therefore, he is. I've witnessed his works, and his influence on my life and the world around me. You'd have a better chance convincing me that you don't exist, than God. I wouldn't attempt to push my beliefs onto you, merely informing you that there IS a state of mind out there that doesn't need proof for matters of faith (hence the name). Second question, about hate, is irrelevant. People will find many reasons to hate, and you have to look beneath the surface to see what's truly there--usually a lack of understanding. jenny: but the most important thing to remember is that the burden of proof is always on the believer This is the truth. It's simple to say you don't believe something exists, it's simple to find fault in one doctrine or teaching, and use it to justify what you've felt all along. Being religious doesn't mean you're gullible or naive--It's sad that faith is seen as a weakness, there are few questions I can't answer about my beliefs, because I research them. I can't prove anything, but if I could, I wouldn't need to--you know?
DarkClouds Posted March 1, 2004 Posted March 1, 2004 Religion should not be dictated but sacred. A friendship between you and your God, completely private. He's the one that I'll call upon for mercy should I ever be in a car accident and in excrutiating physical pain. tHe's he one I call out to, to spare me from the pain of heartbreak and to provide clarity and understanding on why an important relationship has ended. He's the one who will always wait by your side, even when you're not ready to acknowledge or accept him, and that's okay with him. He does not judge you, because in his eyes, you are Perfect, just the way you are now. He is compassionate and loving toward you in your times of joy and hardship knowing that you may only call upon him mostly in your time of need. I'm not religious by any means. I refuse to be placed in one particular religion. I refuse to have it stamped on me. I refuse to judge another's beliefs. I am happy just to be getting to know this friendship. I'm beginning to realise that children should not be placed into the religion 'of our liking'. They should be absolutely free to find their own. God, all he is, is LOVE and LIFE. Love and Life are the same two things.
Darkangelism Posted March 1, 2004 Posted March 1, 2004 Originally posted by dyermaker Where is the proof that love exists? (not rhetorical, answer that) Where is the proof that you exist? That I do? I think, therefore, I am. God works, therefore, he is. I've witnessed his works, and his influence on my life and the world around me. You'd have a better chance convincing me that you don't exist, than God. I wouldn't attempt to push my beliefs onto you, merely informing you that there IS a state of mind out there that doesn't need proof for matters of faith (hence the name). Second question, about hate, is irrelevant. People will find many reasons to hate, and you have to look beneath the surface to see what's truly there--usually a lack of understanding. This is the truth. It's simple to say you don't believe something exists, it's simple to find fault in one doctrine or teaching, and use it to justify what you've felt all along. Being religious doesn't mean you're gullible or naive--It's sad that faith is seen as a weakness, there are few questions I can't answer about my beliefs, because I research them. I can't prove anything, but if I could, I wouldn't need to--you know? love does not exist, it is a human invention. As for the other questions, prove the opposite, prove that i don't exist. Prove that god affected you, prove that it wasnt random chance. I could say that people use senses yo see me, but that is a limited view on existance. But my problem is less with a god figure then it is with established religion, especially Jesus and the Bible. The Bible was written 300 years after he died, the truth gets streched quite a bit over that period of time, also mayn biblical stories are found in other older writings from other cultures. The whole disbelief in evolution too is baffling. No higher being has ever done anything for me, it was chance,society and my own actions that got me here. There have been events in my life that some would say were divine intervention, but i don't see it. I see religion as a way for people to convince themselves that their lives mean something, that when they die there is something else for them. We could all die tomorrow and the universe would barely notice.
jenny Posted March 1, 2004 Posted March 1, 2004 no, to be honest, i just envy the faithful, really. there was a time when i saw it as weak, but i just struggle with it now. many, many, years of liberal university culture and logic had quite a strong influence on my belief systems - i am nothing if not demographically predictable - but i waivered even then. i just don't know. i think it is healthy to struggle, but i still envy those who do not have to. also, to be clear, i respect your faith, in particular. it reminds me a great deal of my father's faith. i do think many people sometimes misuse religion, as i sometimes misuse logic, but you do not; i definitely respect your scholarship. i don't get this: but if I could, I wouldn't need to--you know but i would like to. ***just another note - i think a lot of us are scared of christianity. i find dark cloud's post a little scary; but i would also find any of my papers lauding brechtian aesthetics a little scary now. it's the intensity, and the repetition of dogma, that i am scared of as a weakness in myself. does that make sense?
dyermaker Posted March 1, 2004 Posted March 1, 2004 Originally posted by Darkangelism love does not exist, it is a human invention. I thought that God didn't exist, until I found it. I thought that Love didn't exist, until it found me. The Bible was written 300 years after he died, the truth gets streched quite a bit over that period of time, Try 45 years. The reason the Gospels weren't immediately transcribed is because when Jesus promised to return, the disciples thought he meant in their lifetime. also mayn biblical stories are found in other older writings from other cultures. \ This is because many biblical writings are just that--stories. It's your choice to find a religious truth in them, a choice you clearly don't give a crap about making. The whole disbelief in evolution too is baffling. I believe in evolution. My pope doesn't condemn evolution. It's a scientific theory, you couldn't prove it. But I believe it, because it makes sense. No higher being has ever done anything for me 100% Correct. God doesn't do anything FOR anyone, you have to do it yourself, lest we be robots. I see religion as a way for people to convince themselves that their lives mean something, that when they die there is something else for them. I see vocal atheism as a way for people to assert intellectual superiority over people, that while they live they may feel like they're experiencing a better life on Earth, because they deny faith. Not that there's anything wrong with that, I just don't take well to being looked down upon.
dyermaker Posted March 1, 2004 Posted March 1, 2004 also, to be clear, i respect your faith, in particular. it reminds me a great deal of my father's faith. i do think many people sometimes misuse religion, as i sometimes misuse logic, but you do not; i definitely respect your scholarship. I don't take solace in religion, it's not a teddy bear. I wouldn't believe it if I didn't understand it. So just like when I thought penguins were cute, and wanted to research more about them, I bought books on religion. It costed a bit more, because there are so many differing viewpoints, but the more I read, the more I'm fascinated it, and such scholarship hasn't hurt my faith, it's strengthened it. Also important is prayer. I swear that everything I've asked for, I've received. Call it coincidence if you like, but I've never been shot down. When I need something, I ask for it. It's quite a stellar arrangement. Whether I need the words to say to stop my friend from killing herself, or I just need my damn cell phone back from the Dean of Students, I'm unstoppable with my intercessions. Those of you who value science over faith should read the studies on prayer, they always have surprising results. quote:but if I could, I wouldn't need to--you know jenny, what I meant was, that if God was something so tangible and visible to be proven, thus capacitating me to prove his existence, I wouldn't need to, because it would be so easy to believe in him.
jenny Posted March 1, 2004 Posted March 1, 2004 first, i do take your point about faith as strengthening and enriching, and cell-phone returning, rather than as a solace. i am only scared of my own weaknesses. period. and i was so surprised by this: Those of you who value science over faith should read the studies on prayer, they always have surprising results contradicts your earlier and later seperation of the empirical from the spiritual/rational. can you link to one of these studies - what are the results? a rise in pleasurable body chemicals? actual results that are not examples of post-hoc reasoning? what kind of scientists and institutions carry out these studies - are they objective and secular? i do get quite nervous when people use science to try to demonstrate spiritual truths - they are different systems and i think that boundary should be respected. that is, it seems to me that if religion does not appreciate logic and empiricism pointing out the many probable flaws in doctrine, then science would appreciate religion not attempting to use science for a spiritual agendum. this is not a challenge to you; i'm honestly just surprised by the turn in your argument strategy. if you're up and reading this, and would rather i ask by PM, i will erase and then do so.
dyermaker Posted March 1, 2004 Posted March 1, 2004 Jenny, let me make it absolutely clear that I'm not angered/bothered in the least bit by anything you post. It's ignorance that bothers me, not one's choice in ideology. Ignorant christians bother me just as much as ignorant nonreligious people, I care more about a legitimate discussion than from where one is coming. Originally posted by jenny and i was so surprised by this (...) contradicts your earlier and later seperation of the empirical from the spiritual/rational. this is not a challenge to you; i'm honestly just surprised by the turn in your argument strategy. I wasn't attempting to bridge the gap between science and religion, although I don't think it's as big as we imagine it to be. I do recognize a separation between empirical evidence and faithful trust--only because of the nature of what's being disproved, not through the proccess of (dis)proving it. Science hasn't answered millions of questions, and neither have we had all of our religious questions answered. Anyway, I think you mistook my reference to the scientific powers of prayer. I was referring to how every now and then I hear about scientists who gather together to prove prayer is bullcrap, but can't quite get the evidence. For example, I read about a study of people praying over pregnant women, for a safe delivery without complications. I suck at explaining it, but some had random people pray for their baby, some did not. In every trial the prayed-for people came out higher, and it baffled them. Here's a nice little page on it, I skimmed it, but I need to go to bed soon, so I won't thouroughly read it until morning: http://www.westernsem.edu/bookstore/myers.html
UCFKevin Posted March 1, 2004 Posted March 1, 2004 This is because many biblical writings are just that--stories. It's your choice to find a religious truth in them Ah ha. I was hoping this would be said by someone. If some biblical writings are OBVIOUSLY fabled stories and fake...then why believe any of them at all? If it's a common thought that there WAS no Garden of Eden, that was all just hokum, then how far off a thought would it be that, in that line of reasoning, there was no Jesus?
Recommended Posts