"The White Man's Burden"Quote:
Originally Posted by Here
Printable View
"The White Man's Burden"Quote:
Originally Posted by Here
"The White Man's Burden" has almost nothing to do with natural selection, but imperialism. Also, it has written by Rudyard Kipling.Quote:
Originally Posted by lolpie
Wasn't social darwinism used to justify imperialism? And "TWMB" is basically justifying social darwinism by saying that it's white people's duty or destiny, so "TWMB" has SOMETHING to do with natural selection, because that theory spurred on social darwinism....Quote:
Originally Posted by Here
I don't think I'm making any sense
Hmm, ok, you make sense, but not with the natural selection part. For it would be stupid to kill all your would-be "slaves".Quote:
Originally Posted by lolpie
Rationally speaking, there is no such thing as God.
I'm Buddhist&Christian, I guess. :) Although, I have only gone to Church/Temple once, or twice in my life. :p Based on my current life conditions, without the thought of a greater being guiding me, idk how I would survive.
That is why I believe in God.
Wouldn't really be a point to it all, would there? And this was my 200th post.Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteShadow
Who said anything about killing them off? Just make them powerless and problem solvedQuote:
Originally Posted by Here
For the record, I know God exists, but I'm not going to argue it here, so if that angers you, please speak to me on aim.
What I wanted to say is that I have NEVER seen such HORRIBLE and ridiculously stupid and WEAK pro God arguments. It's utterly pathetic, and makes most of you look like fools.
Perhaps you guys should take a little bit more deep thought into this, rather than regurgitating what you have been told.
Sometimes it doesn't matter if you are right or not, because truth itself is not very persuasive.
[oh yeah, this post is NOT directed at anyone in particular, so don't think I am flaming anyone, I'm just encouraging better thought out posts People such as Here, are creaming you all, lol.]
Thanks for the encourage from a believer, but I'm not a non-believer, nor an atheist. As I said before, I'm an apagnostic, so I really don't care about religion. I'm only arguing for the sake of argument, and as you put it, the pro-God side is putting up truly pathetic reasons.Quote:
Originally Posted by lordgreggreg
I'd also like to see better posts on why God is here. You know what? The Chronicles of Narnia did a much better job than all of you plus a thousand more (besides Lord Greg) could've done, even if you had drums and megaphones. Bad arguments are bad, and there's nothing going for you.
And Lord Greg, for the record, if God exists, then He mustn't be all that people claim he is. Perhaps he's dead or lost control of the world. And drops in every once in a while, to see what a mess stupid idiots are making.
Here's a funnier take on God: http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/God
It's not meant to be taken seriously, so please don't.
PS Uncyclopedia is definately one of the best sites ever
How about Encyclopedia Dramatica?
Meh it doesn't look as good and doesn't have as many articles, not to mention the first thing I saw was a picture of 2 dudes kissing :(
It's not meant to be taken seriously AT ALL. In fact, it wants to be the biggest encyclopaedic blemish on the internet.
Lol lets get this straight and over and done with...Quote:
Originally Posted by rkroxpunk
When I said I think its better to beleive than not to beleive, im really saying being very religious is better than beleive in nothing (my opinion)...
Im Greek orthodox and attend at church nearly every Sunday...
I go to a Catholic school and have also attended at every mass...
At school I have atleast 1 period of religion perday day...
OF COURSE I BELEIVE IN GOD
I didn't find that article that funny really. I didn't look at any of the other articles though. . .Quote:
Originally Posted by lolpie
Yups :) Bad arguments are worse then bad, by making a bad argument supporting this pro God side, it's really hurting your side alot, by making it look weak and stupid, especially when it can be so easily and effectively crushed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Here
And I agree, God is not all that most people claim he is. Most people don't have a single clue on what he is, and (like the bad arguments) just regurgitate and pervert the things that they hear or read.
I have some personal reasons that (unfortunately) have proven to me that he is very alive and active.
This definitely does bring to question why the world is spinning seemingly out of control. And it takes allot of thought to look at it too, but suppose this. God, if he exists, is unarguably all knowing (probably on a quantum overseeing level) and, although lots of really messed up things happen in life, that would really want to make me say "if there was a God, this monstrosity would have never been allowed to happen";
but honestly, on a high level of thinking, perhaps this is all part of his plan for the best. Obviously on a way that I can't really understand, (which unfortunately drags faith into this), but at least it's a logical feasible option.
For basic instance, God can't make any good happen unless there is a bad to contrast it... stuff like that kinda.
Anyhow, that concludes my small, unelaborated counter to him being dead.
As another thing to ponder. Take a brief look at the earth, and it's complexities, may be study a few physic's books on the unbelievably balanced world we are living in.
Despite all of the evolutions theory's (which I do believe are at least 80% correct), I really don't think it would be possible for a human being to arise out of it, unless there was an intelligent thought path driving it. (zomg, may be, God uses evolution?! may be... he programs the world, just like we all do(program)?! may be, instead of starting from scratch each time, he builds off of what he already has, and throws away what doesn't work?)
Anyhow, I know the thing above is really an explanation, not really an argument, but that's really just because I don't feel like posting an argumentative comment at the moment, rather, just something to ponder.
Enjoy :)
Edit: ROFL!! "Don't make their God bust out locusts on yo' ass"
Kudos to Lord Greg for being one of the few to put thought into his post in this "there-is-no-argument-really" thread.
You know, if I believed in God, I would take the Piers Anthony view: that he forsook this world, or is just in an epic battle with Satan to control it. In no way would I worship someone.
Sorry about that. Because you know, believing in something...I'm just not a person of faith.
hash brown
Hmm...Quote:
Originally Posted by Here
So he forsook the world, rather than just guiding it in a weird way...
and he is battling satan, rather than letting us battle satan...
I think the first one is all perceptive.
I can see how it looks like that, and that does make allot of since too. It's even allot easier to explain than my whole guidance idea :). I suppose that it is just my own opinion that he really has an active complete control, just because a few things in my life have happened that are just so "slap you in the face! It's GOD".
I really don't think that God is actively battling Satan. I know that's a cute and classic way of looking at life and how things play out (the devil made me do it!). But honestly, I don't think we would really even have a satanic figure. I heard a quote once, forgive me for regurgitating. It was something like "Satan cannot control you, and God will not control you".Quote:
an epic battle with Satan to control it.
Now, saying that he forsook the world, I interpret as him giving up, deciding we are all going to hell, and moving on to he better behaved universe... I would assume this is concluded by observing all of the crazyness that has happened in the world. I can't prove you wrong one bit unfortunately, but I can make you think about this.Quote:
that he forsook this world,
If God really wanted to test people, if he really wanted to see what they are made of, (which I believe is one of the reasons we are here on earth). Then he wouldn't really be allowed to do much of this "mericle" stuff all the time. That (for the most part) takes faith out of the picture.
If he is going to be helping out... He has got to bless his believer (he promissed) but he probably should do it in such a subtle way... that only people looking for his blessing would even notice it.
Ok, i think i have gone off into explaining things rather than arguing with things. All of what I am saying hinges on the very fact that we are arguing, lol.
So heres a little bit more meat.
Souls. For all of you who believe that humans have souls, yet don't believe in God, this is for you, because that Really close to a contradiction.
Yeah, think about it, just that nature of admitting that every human has a soul that is driving them, not just their brain and instincts...
I don't really think that it is possible to assume that how humans act and feel is really nothing but what their brain thinks to do.
Most people can agree that there is a general good, and bad in the world. Where did this originate? Sure, you can go utilitarian style if you would like to avoid God. But utilitarianism is more of an after thought. Where did all of this get started? I promise you that lesser civilized people rarely classified their actions as good or bad by thinking through how it would affect everyone. lol. I think this Good and bad thing is more inherent than that, and that people knew about it before they even read the bible, got taught it in school, or observed how others act.
I don't think this "good/bad" classification feeling can be explained by instinct either. If all of it was really bend on survival and stuff like that (which alot of it is... but not all) then I could understand it being instinct.
Ok, im going to work, be back around ... 6-7ish.
Well, A. If you don't believe in God, your comment about something that doesn't exist is irrelevant, and B. he doesn't teach us to slaughter and kill. 6th commandment, "Thall Shall not murder"Quote:
Originally Posted by Here
Numbers 14:19 - "In accordance with your great love, forgive the sin of these people, just as you have pardoned them from the time they left Egypt until now."
1 Kings 8:34 - "then hear from heaven and forgive the sin of your people Israel and bring them back to the land you gave to their fathers."
1 Kings 8:36 - "then hear from heaven and forgive the sin of your servants, your people Israel. Teach them the right way to live, and send rain on the land you gave your people for an inheritance."
1 Kings 8:50 - "And forgive your people, who have sinned against you; forgive all the offenses they have committed against you, and cause their conquerors to show them mercy;"
Jeremiah 33:8 - "I will cleanse them from all the sin they have committed against me and will forgive all their sins of rebellion against me."
How about Jesus' prayer, many know as a Lord's prayer in Matthew 6:9 - "Forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors."
How about The Parable of the Unmerciful Servant? Mathew 18:21
Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, "Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother when he sins against me? Up to seven times?"
Jesus answered, "I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times.
Colossians 3:13 - Bear with each other and forgive whatever grievances you may have against one another. Forgive as the Lord forgave you.
I could go on, but you should get the point by now.
As for Darwin creating evolution, that is not what I said. I stated "the popularization of"
And for the living coming from living. I am talking about we have never seen one thing "living" that has come from something that wasn't living. It was from the characteristics of living organisms.
There is some strong evidence of a flood, which also throws the geologic column idea right out the window. There's tons of examples of trees that are upside down or sideways that are sticking through multiple rock layers. This has happened all over the world. And China's dynasties started with the Xia Dynasty which started around 2070BC. The flood is believed to have happened somewhere between 2,000 and 3,000 BC. There's also a few sites that suggest it was around 7,000 years ago. This just makes my point stronger, yes?
"Lastly, who says Nature must follow true logic over thousands of years? And who says that those numbers don't follow logic?"
We have seen nature tends towards disorder and chaos. Soil and mountains are eroding away, we don't see mountains being "pushed up" like evolution suggests. I also find it incredibly hard to believe that "life" just happened to get the right order of strands of RNA to create something that was living and worked. That sounds less likely than something creating it. If you roll 2 dice, the chance of you getting the 2 numbers you wanted are 1:36. Even a small protein has a 1:10^67 of being created. That is 1:100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000
Keep in mind, that is merely a small protein, not even life.
Mathematicians generally agree that, statistically, any odds beyond 1 in 10 to the 50th (1:10^50) have a zero probability of ever happening - Emil Borel, Elements of the Theory of Probability.
Being related to everything could point to either one, it's just evolution is a fallacy. Not to mention it was popularized by a man with severe mental and personality disorders. Never read that in your science books, did'ya?
What about the Crusades?Quote:
Originally Posted by thephanatik
Because all of it happened during prehistoric Earth, when conditions were A LOT different than they are today. I forget the names of the scientists, but 2 of them recreated prehistoric conditions in a test tube. They made conditions similar to those in the prehistoric times, added some electricity and some inorganic molecules....viola - organic molecules were created.Quote:
Originally Posted by thephanatik
The universe is most likely infinite. That means there are trillions of galaxies out there. I would say that life would have to occur on AT LEAST a few planets out of trillions^2 of planets. Earth is just lucky :)Quote:
Originally Posted by thephanatik
So? Lots of unstable people have contributed to science...Stephen Hawking, Einstein, Albus Dumbledore.... :DQuote:
Originally Posted by thephanatik
Why is my comment irrelevant? I can say that the same goes for you, but that won't make any sense on either side. Also, as I stated before, I don't believe in the nonexistence of God, neither do I believe in His existence.Quote:
Originally Posted by thephanatik
He doesn't teach us to slaughter and kill, does he? Well, it seems like you VERY NEATLY sidestepped the Flood. However bad the people were, did he need to kill the whole Earth? Next, in the book of Job, he tortures Job to no end, just to win a wager against Satan. And what happened to Egypt? He did kill a great many people in Egypt too, you know. If he could create the world, why didn't he just use a stronger form of divine intervention to get them out of Egypt? And why are they the only people who can claim the title "His people"? I thought the world was all "His people", being sons of Adam and daughters of Eve?
I see you quote from the bible that you so fervently believe in. Do you want me to do the same?
Genesis 19:24 Then the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven;
Genesis 38:7 And Er, Judah's firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the LORD; and the LORD slew him.
Exodus 7:4 But Pharaoh shall not hearken unto you, that I may lay my hand upon Egypt, and bring forth mine armies, and my people the children of Israel, out of the land of Egypt by great judgments.
Exodus 14:4 And I will harden Pharaoh's heart, that he shall follow after them; and I will be honoured upon Pharaoh, and upon all his host; that the Egyptians may know that I am the LORD. And they did so.
Exodus 15:6 Thy right hand, O LORD, is become glorious in power: thy right hand, O LORD, hath dashed in pieces the enemy.
Exodus 22:20 He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the LORD only, he shall be utterly destroyed.
The whole book of Leviticus is about the cruel sacrifice of animals
Numbers 5:2 Command the children of Israel, that they put out of the camp every leper, and every one that hath an issue, and whosoever is defiled by the dead:
5:3 Both male and female shall ye put out, without the camp shall ye put them; that they defile not their camps, in the midst whereof I dwell.
5:4 And the children of Israel did so, and put them out without the camp: as the LORD spake unto Moses, so did the children of Israel.
You want me to go on? I could go on to list every single book.
Actually, Darwin did create the first well-known theory of evolution. Unless you're talking about human evolution. Which he did also, but was not the strongest proponent.
As for the "living from living", you just affirmed what I said.
Umm, no. China's dynasties have lasted FAR FAR longer than what you say. And let's say the flood is true. Then that affirms what I say about God being a murderer, no? And there's no proof that the flood was a divine thing.
I can disprove your last statement without going over the first part. Mathematicians DO NOT generally agree that odds in 1:10^50 are BOUND not to happen. If that were true, as you stated, then there would be nobody studying quantum mechanics.
Hmm, well, using your first statement against you, if you don't believe it, then your comment is irrelevant. Otherwise, to disprove it, that's just plain stupid. You whole last paragraph hinges on the "fact" that Darwin had mental disorders. But as you yourself said, Darwin didn't create the theory of human evolution. So there goes that out the window, huh?
Your whole post is full of contradictions and holes. Patch them up for me so I can actually have a debatable opponent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lolpie
The test tube thing was disproved a long time ago, but like most stuff with evolution, when it is disproved, it just dies, there is no "we were wrong, sorry people"
For the sake of argument. There is VERY VERY few planets actually suitable for life. And there are some problems even with that. They believed that there wasn't any oxygen, but there wouldn't be any ozone. UV rays would kill the organisms then. This is a commonly known thing. Laboratories commonly use UV lights to sterilize stuff. If there was oxygen, this would have killed the organisms too.
But were any of them suffering from depersonalization?
How was the test tube thing disproved? Because they PROVED that it actually worked. So how did they disprove something that was already proved? And more importantly, why is my high school biology teacher still teaching it then?Quote:
Originally Posted by thephanatik
And how would you know how many planets are/were actually suitable for life? Have you been to other galaxies or solar systems? A few of your statements aren't even understandable. "They believed that there wasn't any oxygen, but there wouldn't be any ozone." Such as that. How do you know there would be no ozone in the atmosphere of the planet?
And even if they were suffering from depersonalization, they proved their shit. Depersonalization just means they felt like they were living in a dream and didn't have a strong sense of reality.
I command you to respond to my post too, phanatik.
Here's getting antsy. Nothing to argue about :)
You are referring to the Miller and Urey experiment. They claimed to have made simple amino acids, which makes up RNA, which then makes up DNA. No one has yet to create life from this.Quote:
Originally Posted by crossback7
http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2097
We can see other planets. You don't need to physically visit planets to know what they are life. There are very complicated techniques they use to identify the atmospheric composition of other planets. Not to mention the extreme temperatures of some planets that obviously cannot support life. There are tons of other requirements needed for life, which most planets do not have. There was an outstanding video I saw on it, but I can't seem to remember the name of it.
How do you know there would be no ozone in the atmosphere of the planet?
They didn't believe to be any Oxygen at the time of the first life being created. Oxygen would have destroyed the combinations needed to create the amino acids. Now they know that there must have been oxygen, because the UV light would have killed the life too. The UV light would have also reacted with the water vapor and created oxygen. We now know that there was actually at least 10% MORE oxygen than there is now. 1% oxygen would have been enough to destroy it.
http://www.layevangelism.com/advtxbk...10/sec10-3.htm
Edit:
Two well known scientists calculated the odds of life forming by natural processes. They estimated that there is less than 1 chance in 10^40,000 that life could have originated by random trials.
thephanatik, you're still not responding to ME.
I have a MUCH stronger argument, because it DIRECTLY responds to yours. Because yours is MUCH weaker than mine.
Haha, calm down
K phanatic...here is a picture of the known galaxies:
http://img243.imageshack.us/img243/6...ndstarsfy0.jpg
People say that many planets won't support life as we know it. We don't know what life is. Therefore, life other than what we know must exist. :D
Also, here's an article http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?cha...F483414B7F0000
First of all, most of your statements are talking about GOD destroying the corrupt and wicked. This not teaching US to go slaughter millions of Jewish people because they are an inferior race. A lot of them were also referring to wars and destroying the enemy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Here
And for the animal cruelty: Old Testament, before Jesus died for our sins. No longer relevant to our lives.
Others, including Darwin's own wife, argued that his mental problem stemmed from guilt over his life's goal to refute the argument for God from design (Bean, 1978, p. 574; p. 28; Pasnau, 1990, p. 126).
As I edited to my last post, its actually 1:1^40,000 for life to have been created.
Before the Xia dynasty was the Three Sovereigns and Five Emperors. These were MYTHOLOGICAL rulers. There was people living there, but there was also people living before the flood too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanhuangwudi
There you go, lots of stuff to type, not enough time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Here
I also don't see you producing much of your own information to support evolution, just trying to refute everything I say.
So, God can break the rules because he is Almighty, huh? How would you like it if your parents did that to you? You don't. Unless you're trying to imply that God is the biggest hypocrite in the universe. If God can create the world in seven days, then he can surely remove these "enemies" of his (why does he have so many enemies anyways? Isn't he the Supreme?) without resorting to cruel and unusual methods.Quote:
Originally Posted by thephanatik
Well, you refer mostly to the old testament, so I did too. I can pull a lot of stuff out of the new testament too, if you wish. Especially Revelations.
With the Darwin thing, you just disproved your own point. He knew what he was doing was wrong, but he also knew it was the truth. So either it doesn't support you at all, or it undermines you.
As for the China info, I'll admit I was wrong, I had read the dates terribly. But again, I tell you that the flood has no proof of divine intervention.
Yes, I explained why I "try to refute everything you say" in a previous post. I will not reiterate here, but proof by contradiction is also a valid proof.Quote:
Originally Posted by thephanatik
Wow... you guys really need to pick your battles. Your basically falling into every trap!
When you debate, you need to think as much of the opponents arguments, as well as your own (please, I learned that in like middle school).
Some one really needs to get here to switch sides, lol. [] is utterly slaughtering every weak post here (thank you for doing so). So.. stop making them!
EDIT:
Forgive me, I don't have a clue where this conversation started, or even what its about. So im just going to take bits of pieces of what I read recently. Sorry.
This is genesis stuff. Which is probably some of the most abstract crap in the bible. Anyhows, It is stated quite a few times in the bible (please don't make me look them up) That Gods time scale is NOT the same as ours. A few biblical quotes give some ratio's of it, but I think its even more advanced than that, I think the ratio of God's time to ours can VARY as he chooses.Quote:
God can create the world in seven days
God doesnt really have enemies. not even the devil really. And although god theoreticaly could, at any point in time, remove anyone or thing that is against him. He never would. It would defeat the entire plan of salvation. It would make earth a worthless, dull, unchallenging experience. There must always be a contrast, with out bad, good does not exist. God wasn't trying to get people out of Egypt, he was trying their faith. Pushing them to thier limits. There were experiences in egypt that needed to happen, both for the people at the time, and people reading about them. If God wanted them out of egypt, they would have never been there in the first place.Quote:
then he can surely remove these "enemies" of his (why does he have so many enemies anyways? Isn't he the Supreme?)
Why would god ever try to adhere to our standards of cruel and unusual? Theres no point in making what he does look good to us. God>Bill of rights (or may be it was the constitution.. sorry)Quote:
without resorting to cruel and unusual methods.
Anyhow, I know this picking apart is a bit unfair, I'll try to stay up to speed for now on.
You know, you're right again.Quote:
Originally Posted by lordgreggreg
If you can portray to me a loving God without resorting to the Bible, then I'll have nothing to say. Chronicles of Narnia could've made me become Christian again. But then I also read the Golden Compass series.
I say don't look to the bible, because that's one of THE WORST examples of love you can give me. People compare its violence to the Qur'an, if that means anything to you.
You want me to prove God is loving without using the Bible? I can do that...
http://tinyurl.com/quufe
http://tinyurl.com/dry6p
http://tinyurl.com/2lp3v8
http://tinyurl.com/l3qho
http://tinyurl.com/363of7
Omg, are you kidding me???? Just because a kittens face looks cute to your humans eyes has next to NOTHING to do with god being loving!Quote:
Originally Posted by thephanatik
Oh wait, are your trying to say that god loves you so much , he made kittens have cute faces so you could look at them on the internet and be happy? Thats pathetically abstract, and relys upon way to many debatable points. (One of them being that kittens are cute, lol)
Way to ruin a good opportunity.
Here, I'll give you a decent example in a little bit ok?
Edit: Ok, this turned out to be allot harder than I thought. Not because there arent any, but more of, there arent any that are blatant enough. (ie not personal)
God, for the most part, is just. I would say tht that is his most defining quality. Jesus, on the other hand, is the forgiving one, (forgive me if I am confusing you by separating them).
And unfortunatly, the only decent documentary on christ we have is the bible, so .. trash that.
What about now...
A while back... I made a post about a baby bird my fiencee brought home. I didn't know how to take care of it, and I probably would have killed it. It was supposed to receive food every hour... I didn't feed it for at least a 13... It was weak, it couldn't open its eyes, and it was getting cold. I knew it was going to die. (I apologize for the lack of real evidence, I never thought it necessary to video take me try to count its pulse, of measure its temperature).
Long story short, I got attached to that bird, I was breaking down emotionally, the bird was breaking down physically.
i asked God for help, stopped crying, went to sleep, the bird was better in the morning, and we were finally contacted by an expert who could take care of it.
It's a small thing, but its the most recent thing that happened to me that I attribute to be related to God more then most other chances.
I know this is a pretty weak argument, and most people would consider this just bull and that the bird would have made it just fine regardless of my prayr or not. Perhaps the reason I felt better after the prayr was just because in my head I felt that a god was going to take care of it, putting me at ease.
But look, I'm no fool, and If i had any choice whether to believe in God or not, I wouldn't. But unfortunately I know that there was a little bit more than random chance helping me out there.
...sigh... Here, you win. I can't show you a loving God without referring to the bible. Because it is only in the bible where I can avoid annoying issues such as "was it god who did that?"
You can notice a loving god, once you admit that things don't happen by chance.
It was a joke. It wasn't meant to be all that serious.Quote:
Originally Posted by lordgreggreg
All right. Let's see now...Quote:
Originally Posted by lordgreggreg
First of all, I agree with you, the time scale thing is off. I have thought about it ever since I have become an apagnostic. So I have nothing to say there, except that I don't really believe God created the world by himself. Even scientists have team members.
Next, with the enemies, I was responding to another quote in which phanatik said that God was destroying his "enemies". So I don't believe God has "enemies" either, what with everyone being sons of His. As for the Devil, if he did not exist, then the point of God would be gone too. So they are more team members than enemies. God WOULD NOT destroy Satan. Else people would stop believing in him (for people that would still believe, I respect them very highly.)
The "cruel and unusual" is the only thing I disagree with. God is purported to have an infinite sense of mercy, what stops him from using it? And I was quoting from the Bill of Rights to show a point, not referring to it.
So yes, I have agreed with you on some points there. Why? Read on.
I have finally found what bugs me about people that try to prove the existence of God. God is the Ultimate, the Almighty. Why would he want YOU to be definite of his presence? A tiny little smidgen? What proof do you have that he has not created another universe, and forsaken you? None.
Next, I have no problem with Christians in general. In fact, I even welcome the Jehovah's Witnesses who come to my doorstep every so often to try and make me join their local church. I always decline politely, but I love them for they GENUINELY believe they are working for MY welfare. Also, they try to make me join NOT by trying to prove the existence of God, but by showing how I can be a loving person, and how THEY are too. Nowhere in their pamphlets do they tell me to believe in God. They are a persistent, kind people, people I would rather talk with than argue.
Next, religion has already conceded proofing to science.
Lastly, when you try to PROVE God, you are not resorting to faith (not blind faith, which I despise), but are coming onto science's grounds. I am SURE God does NOT want to you try and prove him, but rather love him, or spread love to other people.
If God is all that [phanatik] says he is, I'd rather not trust him with my welfare. Though I am less perfect, I prefer my independence to his control of destiny. If God is portrayed as a human, who is able to make mistakes, yet follows the same rules as we do, I would be more likely to believe in him. With the state of the world, the latter seems more real.
I have seen your kittens post, thephanatik. I am amused at what you resort to. Want me to pull out my own pics?
A cat.
Another cat.
A last cat.
They're all cute in their own ways, but my point is that trying to prove the kindness of God with kittens is futile.
Jesus in my opinion is the one with mercy. God doesn't use it because he doesn't really need to. Mabey some people really needed to see "Locusts up on ya azz". Perhaps by deciding to be a bit harsh was the most merciful thing he could do. Sure, mabey not on earth, but as a lesson that can help them thereafter. If you think of earthlings as his children, sometimes the parent needs to be merciful and forgiving, other times, it's time for a whooping. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Here
Yes! Exactly! If it were so easy to prove his existence, then that would just defeat the purpose of testing people. It would remove any and all rewards of trust and faith! I don't think god will EVER do anything to prove his existence unless he KNOWS that people still won't believe. (exodus for example)Quote:
Originally Posted by Here
Well, as far as him making another universe, yeah, none. In fact, ive a good hunch that he already has... there are references to it in the bible.Quote:
Originally Posted by Here
Now, as far as forsaken this one? I have the bible saying that the earth is supposed to get really wiked and .. away from god.. as it can before he finally comes back (second comming). And I have my own personal revelations that force me to belive that he still, not only cares about what happens on earth, but has his hand in every little bit of it.
What proof do you have that he has forsaken this world?
I have never really read through their pamplets... but I agree with you, they are very nice people, who really believe in what they think. It's a good idea to not really try to prove god's existence, it's supposed to be hard, in fact, it's supposed to be impossible. The only thing that can prove someting like that is a personal conversion, whatever form that will take. (I belive that 90% of all god belivers, if not more, don't truly belive in him, because they have not had this... therefore they have no proof, and just have faith blindly).Quote:
Originally Posted by Here
This blind faith explains quite a few of the downfalls of most organized religion.
Yeah, i suppose that is true by definition. But not all evidence has to by hard science fact's does it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Here
Yes, I don't want anyhting to do with a God that want's to control me. But that's jsut the point. It's VERY obvious that god doesnt do this. It is becisary for any trial or test, and obvoiusly, on earth; for every person to have their own free agency. Thats so unbelievably necessary that God won't stop even the most evil of actions, because by doing so, he would be taking that away from someone. (Want proof, look at the world, he obviously doesnt stop bad things).Quote:
Originally Posted by Here
Me too. It's a humiliating rebuttle.Quote:
Originally Posted by Here
I've never thought of the merciful = wrath thing, and though it is brain food, I'm still skeptical. But it certainly provides a new view. Makes me think of the generic parent. In which this analogy makes perfect sense. I'll think about that. But sometimes, I don't think it applies, and can't help but think he's overdoing it (the flood again).Quote:
Originally Posted by lordgreggreg
If God wanted people to know that he existed, then I wouldn't be disagreeing with thephanatik right now, because I would know he was there. But he doesn't make me. So no go either way.
Ok, I have as much proof as you have in this "forsaken" aspect, which is none. Maybe he has, maybe he hasn't. And the Revelations (no matter how violent they are) still support the opinion that he just might come back to rain judgment. In which case, I hope he's pretty lenient. Because if he does come back as a strict schoolteacher, I'm not going to be playing a harp (at least by the evangelist definition. I'm a good person at heart, I think).
Yes, most people only believe in God because their parents do, which provides me with a healthy dose of skepticism. But a personal commitment, or a true conversion, as you call it, should be kept to, and I will not try to argue the existence of God with someone who has had one. I keep my opinions to myself with those people, but try to discuss WHAT God does in his existence.
No, it doesn't, but it's hard for me to be a person of faith, so I tend to be a science-believer. A bit too much. Because religion had the same hold on people that science does now. Who knows, maybe something new will spring up in the next millennium that doesn't deal with central figures or laws of the universe.
In truth, as a Christian, I didn't believe in the existence of Hell. I believed in his infinite mercy upon all living things, no matter how cruel the person was in life. I don't know how that works out, but God himself doesn't work out in terms of human minds (as in, he's quite incomprehensible).
But we're probably just talking to ourselves right now. It seems as if the evangelist Christians/atheists have disappeared.