Even if God does or does not truly exist then what does that change?
If people understood that there was no God, subsequently, there no heaven and hell, I believe the world would be a much better place. Especially in countries that are Islamic. They would suddenly realize that their terrorist activities are in vain, and that there are no 72 virgins. Concerning Christianity -I think we will take it better, because we all share the same values. Nothing would really change, except for going to church. And shops might be open on sundays!!! (in Perth most shops are closed on sundays). People would live life to the fullest, because they know there is no life after death.
To me, God is a logical explanation for something totally illogical. We just don't have the ability to answer some questions. The God Hypothesis can be compared to someone trying to find the square root of a negative number; it can't be explained in real numbers.
With religion divides the world, and turns people against each other because of their beliefs. In Afghanistam, converting to Christianity is punishable by death. With it religion also comes prejudices. George Bush (jnr) was reported to say that Athiests should not be considered citizens of America (I have citiation). What kind of democracy supports such prejudice? Saying thiests are superior to athiests is like saying anglo-saxons are superior to jews or blacks. It is funny to note that some of the founding fathers of America were athiests/agnostics, and in the constitution (I think), it says that America should not be founded on Christianity or such religion (this MAY be wrong, but I will check up on it).
Joined: 22 Dec 2004 Location: Tiberium Research Center N27
Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 3:25 am Post subject:
- There are 8 virgins, you will have to divide them as well.
- Well?
- Screw this, we are going to Bahamas!
- Bahahamaaaaaas!
*Passengers storm in*
- We are going to Bahamas!
- You're lying
*Boom* _________________ DUNK! QUICK_EDIT
If people understood that there was no God, subsequently, there no heaven and hell, I believe the world would be a much better place.
how exactly though?
Quote:
Especially in countries that are Islamic. They would suddenly realize that their terrorist activities are in vain, and that there are no 72 virgins.
well now that's a general assumption of classifying all Islams as believing that and that they are all terrorists.
Quote:
Concerning Christianity -I think we will take it better, because we all share the same values. Nothing would really change, except for going to church. And shops might be open on sundays!!! (in Perth most shops are closed on sundays).
exactly nothing major in life would change so why pry away someones happiness just because you think they are wrong or that their beliefs are just illogical?
And yes many people do share the same values but not necessarily learn the same morals or at least not at the same time or through the same methods. But again it's what works best for the individual and that only that individual can decide what is best for him or her.
Quote:
People would live life to the fullest, because they know there is no life after death.
Honestly the view some people have on what living life to the fullest is quite scary to me. I don't want drunkards who have no fear of consequence to come bashing into me while driving. I don't want more partyers who think they can do anything and not have consequences. Sure not all people see a life of partying and doing stupid things as living life to the fullest but surely a lot do especially here in America. At least the fear of consequences in the afterlife does somewhat keep people from going all out on stupidity even if it opens them up to a different kind. People can live life to the fullest any time they want anyways it just depends on what their view of living life to the fullest really means. Yes people should be free to have fun and but they need to be responsible enough to know how to handle their fun and from going too far with it.
Secondly life after death is one of those things that many including myself will never believe in. However, it is also something that can never be proven to not exist at least nothing to my knowledge or recollection have I ever heard of any assumptions on how to prove it wrong. If you think it could be explained then please share your opinion on how.
Quote:
To me, God is a logical explanation for something totally illogical. We just don't have the ability to answer some questions. The God Hypothesis can be compared to someone trying to find the square root of a negative number; it can't be explained in real numbers.
yet we use non-real/imaginary numbers to achieve answers to some mathematical problems. So why not allow some people to do so in their life if it works for the problem they are solving in their life?
Quote:
With religion divides the world, and turns people against each other because of their beliefs.
yes it's called ignorance and intolerance sadly all humans have this flaw to some degree and will most likely never be overcome. However, who is to say that the world won't be divided through petty science/math debates if a time comes when it isn't science vs religion? A good satire on this would be the South park episodes "Go God Go" and "Go God Go XII" In the episodes, though i think it's more of the 2nd one than the first, Cartman awakens in a future in which Religion has been disproved and instead a 3 way war over which group science is correct is going on and it is over some tiny stupid thing.
Quote:
With it religion also comes prejudices. George Bush (jnr) was reported to say that Athiests should not be considered citizens of America (I have citiation). What kind of democracy supports such prejudice?
Yes with a variety of differences comes prejudices. But there is no stopping different thought processes or how people appear physically. And that would just be one bland ass world if everyone was the same.
Also please don't tell me that the link to the comic is your citation for your accusation on Bush (jnr) If you say you have citation then give it or at least be specific so we can find that citation.
Quote:
Saying thiests are superior to athiests is like saying anglo-saxons are superior to jews or blacks.
I completely agree but were are we going with this? if you are using this to bash Bush then why put it in this thread?
Though I can use this statement against you. If by using this statement you are saying that theists and atheists answers are not greater than the other then why try to tell someone that their answer that works for them is wrong just because it doesn't seem logical to you or to science?
Guilty until proven innocent is similar to Possible until proven impossible and God has yet to be 100% proven impossible to exist.
Quote:
It is funny to note that some of the founding fathers of America were athiests/agnostics, and in the constitution (I think), it says that America should not be founded on Christianity or such religion (this MAY be wrong, but I will check up on it).
What makes it funny? America isn't a nation of just Christianity you know. Sure it is the dominate religion across the nation but it's the dominate religion across the world too. Sure quite a bit of people may think it should be a Christian nation but I'm willing to bet that it's a small percentage of the whole that think that. _________________ Kalistia Crestland (2)
In Soviet Russia, grass grows on tiberium! QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 25 Sep 2006 Location: Teamblackistan Posts: Over 9000
Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 6:33 am Post subject:
Nice job at not taking sides, Ix.
Now, in regards to Dafool's post
Galileo wrote:
The Bible tells how to get to heaven, not how the heavens go
DaFool I sense a great deal of your arguments are based on speculation of what you think the bible says, though not having read it or studied it yourself, some of your arguments don't hold much water. (No disrespect, just being frank)
For example, it very much sounds like you're saying "I think I read somewhere in the bible that the earth was flat, and every reference to the earth being round must have been added later"
The Bible never intended to teach the shape of the earth, or the formation of the planets in the solar system. Never once does it remotely imply that earth is in the center of the solar system (hence Galileo's quote).
it did leave bread crumbs such as the "as far as East is from the West" thing I brought up, but it never says flat out what the shape of the earth is (no pun intended)
the bunny wrote:
A great example is when a man on American TV show asked viewers to give $8 million to him or God would kill him. They believed him, and he recieved over $8 million.
It's funny how you totally ignored my quote, even though you used it in the same post
Quote:
My faith isn't based on any priest, organization, or church building
Let the idiots believe in their 7-days week creation, let them believe that Satan put those bones in the ground to fool everyone, let them believe that the Jews made deals with the reptilians and Satan and control the world media (serious, some christians on youtube must have the intelligence of a beercan), let them believe evolution is impossible...
I can only say this, I respect those that follow moral codes and divide "God" from the scientific reality, and the rest, I can only pity the rest for ignorance and stupidity. QUICK_EDIT
Dude, read THE FIRST THING IN THE BIBLE. I have read the greater part of the first testament, I just don't all the "LUKE21:345:2838:293" citations for it. The first story in the bible DOES describe hwo they thought the earth was. There is like a "sphere" of water, and then a dome (which is a half sphere) of air (the "sky") in the middle of it. The stars are on the top of the dome, and then the earth rises out of the bottom. Thats page 1 of the bible, so you don't have to look far.
There is alot of stuff about morals in the bible, but historically the christians have taught one thing and done another. They send out missionairies to pacify a people and then send their armies in after the missionairies have done their job. You have things like the crusades and the inquisition, the 100 years war, the second estate in the French Revolution, and the persecution of great scientific minds. SO maybe christianity at it's heart wants to be good, but the church has been downright evil. If you don't need a priest, organization, or church building, then the church should be abolished.
I beleive that religions in general are false, just mere stories told by the ancients in order to explain natural phenomina, that have somehow survived past when science can explain why things really happen. As for morals, you have philosophy to deal with that. I don't really want to get into specific stories in the bible anymore to point out their contradictions and their falsities, my strongpoint is the basic fundamentals. _________________ Please, read the signature rules of the forum. QUICK_EDIT
I have read it before, and I read it again from the link in your post earlier.
Quote:
The first story in the bible DOES describe hwo they thought the earth was. There is like a "sphere" of water, and then a dome (which is a half sphere) of air (the "sky") in the middle of it. The stars are on the top of the dome, and then the earth rises out of the bottom.
Where does it say that? I looked good and hard, just to be sure. It does not say that anywhere. I'll admit, it doesn't say it was round, but it doesn't say it was flat either. _________________ Steel Talons Commander QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 25 Sep 2006 Location: Teamblackistan Posts: Over 9000
Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 5:41 pm Post subject:
my purpose in posting in this topic, is to difference between following the church and following the Bible, as some people think they are one and the same.
I am getting tired of this topic, because all the skeptics have to do is read the Bible for themselves to see the difference; though they seem content to stand on the sidelines and ridicule something they don't even fully understand.
So unless there's some deep, insightful post that I feel so compelled to respond to, I have no intention of posting in this topic further.
I've already said everything I needed to say here. _________________ The Fall of Hammerfest - Epic Tiberian chain story
Tiberian Odyssey mapping department. Discord The Team Black Index QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 16 Feb 2005 Location: North America Posts: You cannot comprehend...
Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 11:35 pm Post subject:
I feel this to be the most important thing I've ever heard: "Life is as YOU make it. (Not some priest)" Ever since I heard this, my life is so simple and easy and happy and good. I'm so content and confident. Nothing could go wrong in the long run. If something pops up that doesn't instantly kill me, I'll simply analyze it, then adapt, then move on! Life is good, if expensive.
If everyone was taught this, that you need only believe in yourself, religion would be obselete.
The Bible has helped Team Black to better communicate and relate to others, maybe respect others, generally treat others positively, as best as humanly possible, which is good. I personally don't respect anyone, but I do treat others well, to the best of my ability and if the situation allows it; I try to see through their point of veiw on subject matter. I didn't need a Bible to think like that, just decent parenting, plus my own intuition. And I'm not insulting anyones parents. _________________ Destroy to create. All for the hunt to dominate!
A funny thing happened yesterday in my Religion class; my teacher made a bold statement and said that animals don't have free will, and that they are purely instincitve. My RE teacher is also a science teacher, which makes what he said more unbelievable.
Obviously he has based his ideas on his religion and the bible, compared scientific reasoning and common sense. I have a rabbit -and it has such a personality. It is so affectionate, it gets jealous, and has some idea of right and wrong. Are you telling me that this is purely instinctive? Maybe it is, but I don't think an animal with no free will can have personality. And if you believe in the theory of evolution (does anyone not, here?), it is obvious that we are animals as well. Well, we have free will, so what he said is total bullshit.
My Ignorant RE teacher also believes that god made humans as leaders of all the animals. Well, humans haven't been around for that long compared to animals like the dinosaurs etc., So how could we be the leaders when we didn't even come first?
Note: This is not supposed to be offensive, just a firendly debate/discussion. I would like to konw what everyone else thinks of the matter, namely Team Black and Ixith. QUICK_EDIT
well Tartan if your teacher actually said that then I must agree that your teacher was taking a bold statement. I personally feel similarly to you on that topic. I feel that animals very well do have their own personalities and act on their own will depending on circumstances. A good example is a dog me and my family had awhile back. It was half German Shepard and have Siberian Husky. It was really attached to my dad and made many smart decisions to get what it wanted or to get back at whoever might have pissed it off. One time when my dad's girlfriend at the time locked it out of their room it in turn went and chewed up a single shoe of a pair of hers. I have many examples of this with this dog and others of how it learned. One of my favorites being how it wanted to get one of those pesky turkey vultures that live around here. So it went and killed a groundhog then laid it out in the middle of the yard and then it went and hide in the shade of a tree until they came to eat away on the dead groundhog. By doing so he eventually got one of the turkey vultures. I suppose you can try to call that instincts but I personally believe it was creative thinking on the dogs behalf which shows that it thinks and acts for itself.
I also disagree that God would have made us as the leading animals. Sure we have great minds and reasoning abilities and have dominated the world but there will be one day when the human race dies out and life goes on with another dominate species of animal. Same goes for religions. Eventually Christianity will no longer be the leading religion. This pattern goes for just about all things really. Rome was the leading civilization for a while but eventually even it fell.
But again let people believe what they wish. Then if a time comes to ever completely prove their beliefs wrong then let them handle that as it is a process which only they themselves can go through.
And like Team Black I see no real debate in here anymore at least not one that is going anywhere at all. I have put out my views so unless something comes up that I really feel I need to post on I probably won't be doing anymore posting in this thread. _________________ Kalistia Crestland (2)
In Soviet Russia, grass grows on tiberium! QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 16 Feb 2005 Location: North America Posts: You cannot comprehend...
Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 4:29 pm Post subject:
R U SHITTIN ME??? Animals find peace and balance with the Earth, Humans do not. We spread, and consume, like a virus! Us jolly old humans. _________________ Destroy to create. All for the hunt to dominate!
Joined: 25 Sep 2006 Location: Teamblackistan Posts: Over 9000
Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 5:59 pm Post subject:
That is correct. All animals have natural predators to keep their population in check.
Humans must learn to control themselves in order to keep from overpopulating the globe.
Joined: 16 Feb 2005 Location: North America Posts: You cannot comprehend...
Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2008 1:55 am Post subject:
Ahh, right. If there were no Bears, then dogs would be unchecked, or something like that. Nothing can keep humans in check, except other humans and maybe a wicked virus, an ALIEN virus..... thats right, one from outer space, one from the GREAT BEYOND, one from the heavens, says the God fearing folk (Jupiter PWNZ yer God), one from the stars, one from the VACUUM, one from one from the fourth & beyond rock(s) from the sun, from the... FROM. _________________ Destroy to create. All for the hunt to dominate!
Joined: 26 Nov 2002 Location: Algae Colony On Mars
Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2008 12:09 pm Post subject:
Team Black wrote:
That is correct. All animals have natural predators to keep their population in check.
Humans must learn to control themselves in order to keep from overpopulating the globe.
We're not controlled by ourselves, viruses and bacteria wipe us out. As population increases, viruses and infections are more prone to spreading. The infection will pretty much wipe out the humans with weaker immune systems and leave the stronger ones alive, it's called natural selection. These stronger humans will spread their genes across the planet, resulting in a more hardy group of humans. Just because we've transcended other life on this planet in intelligence it doesn't mean we're no longer bound by its rules. _________________
Quote:
This is sexier than what this forum was supposed to tolerate. - Banshee
Joined: 26 Nov 2002 Location: Algae Colony On Mars
Posted: Mon Sep 22, 2008 12:18 am Post subject:
Quote:
Natural selection has been replaced by technological/economical selection.
They die, we live... money and technology have replaced evolution.
I wouldn't say access to money affects evolution otherwise extremely poor parts of the world would have no inhabitants. Money and technology affect life expectancy but doesn't change the gene pool. _________________
Quote:
This is sexier than what this forum was supposed to tolerate. - Banshee
well, lets look at how technology affects natural selection.
A person has messed up teeth; this is a bad trait. They get braces and it straightens the teeth. The teeth are now good but the genes have not been changed. That person now has equal footing in mate competition as someone who was born with the good genes.
Now thats purely cosmetic, but in today society, appearance has alot to do with attraction. But the question one must ask is this: Does the technology that fixes a genetic problem justify the fact that the problem will now spread beyond control. _________________ Please, read the signature rules of the forum. QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 16 Feb 2005 Location: North America Posts: You cannot comprehend...
Posted: Mon Sep 22, 2008 2:10 am Post subject:
We need technology to advance to the point were it can solve, fix, genetic defects. There would be no bad teeth, missing limbs, eyes, ears, hair would last forever, instead of shrinking when we get real old, we stay fit, without doing anything except altering our genes, there'd be no fat chicks. OBESITY - would vanish.
Then again, experiments could go horribly wrong... _________________ Destroy to create. All for the hunt to dominate!
Joined: 26 Nov 2002 Location: Algae Colony On Mars
Posted: Mon Sep 22, 2008 9:39 am Post subject:
DaFool wrote:
well, lets look at how technology affects natural selection.
A person has messed up teeth; this is a bad trait. They get braces and it straightens the teeth. The teeth are now good but the genes have not been changed. That person now has equal footing in mate competition as someone who was born with the good genes.
Now thats purely cosmetic, but in today society, appearance has alot to do with attraction. But the question one must ask is this: Does the technology that fixes a genetic problem justify the fact that the problem will now spread beyond control.
You may be right but it's still not completely true in modern society. They will most likely still have kids, just not with a husband/wife of their original preference. Fat, ugly, disabled or poor people still get married and have children even though they're "not ideal" for progressing the gene pool. _________________
Quote:
This is sexier than what this forum was supposed to tolerate. - Banshee
true, in retrospect it may be good for the gene pool because it allows the "good" traits to be spread and not just contained between others with "good" traits, but then the value of this depends wether or not the "good" traits are dominant or not.
H.G.Wells make an interesting assertion of the future in his story "The Time Machine", where in the future man has eveloved into two species. One is the descendants of the bourgouise-they are pretty little things, the result of ages of breeding beauty. They have lost all traces of hard work, intelligence, they live ina world evolved to their lifestyle-food grows plentiful for them. The other species is the descendants of the proletariat, they are ugly albinos that were forced to live underground. They work machines in order to keep themselves alive. They are starved, they can eat only meat(and the only meat available just happens to be the other species. I know his story is really exaggerated, but hey it's literature meant to entertain. Suppose that mankind became several different species because only the attractive would mate with the attractive and the ugly with the ugly. _________________ Please, read the signature rules of the forum. QUICK_EDIT
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
If by using this statement you are saying that theists and atheists answers are not greater than the other then why try to tell someone that their answer that works for them is wrong just because it doesn't seem logical to you or to science?
