yerded
Bertinator
+255|6892|Westminster, California

Soldier-Of-Wasteland wrote:

Man has created God, not the other way around.
There are many similar traits in religions spanning different times and continents.  Up until very recent times        ( historically speaking ) it is been fashionable to believe in all sorts of Gods.

     There's stronger historical proof that religion has been used as a political tool to establish a hierarchy than there is historical proof that any miracles occurred that could be proven. Jesus was certainly a man who lived and died. He may have been a profound man, but he was a man.
     The fraud began when the apostles established the first Papalcy. It was a agreed upon line of succession, mostly set up to consolidate power and confine it to the Catholic church.

     I sometimes get dragged to church by my wife. I always chuckle when the preacher starts in about how only man has a soul, animals can't go to heaven...blah blah blah.

     The widely accepted notion that only man of all living things has a soul proves to me beyond a doubt that humans are still stupid and ego driven and primitive.

     I believe that history will look back on this era as one of technology bound and chained by archaic beliefs in silly myths that prevented social and economic development.
     Yes I am talking about religion.

NO RELIGION KNOW PEACE
mcminty
Moderating your content for the Australian Govt.
+879|6977|Sydney, Australia

JaMDuDe wrote:

Evolution doesnt have any solid proof or evidence. Its flexible so when they find things that go against it they just make another theory on how it happened. Please show me solid evidence of evolution. I know ive seen evidence before but i havent seen any solid proof that obviously points to evolution.

No they books ive been reading arent based on proving evolution wrong and saying God created us in 7 days. They are written by scientists who were atheists and evolutionists and then they studied astronomy, cosmology, physics and biochemistry and found that evolution isnt the most reasonable thing to believe.
Are you serious? Can you not find one single piece of evidence for evolution? Ok...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution wrote:

In biology, evolution is the process by which novel traits arise in populations and are passed on from generation to generation. Its occurrence over long stretches of time explains the origin of new species (speciation) and ultimately the vast diversity of the biological world. Contemporary species are related to each other through common descent, products of evolution and speciation over billions of years
Ever thought why people from different areas of the world look different? It's because different populations evolved differently.

People from Europe lived in a colder climate. There is less direct sunlight. The people with light skin, those with favourable traits passes the genes on.

Take a similar look at Africa. The climate there involved harsh conditions, and a lot of direct sunlight (closer to the equator). The favourable skin trait would have more Melanin, creating a dark skin. They evolved to have that skin colour.
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6930|Canberra, AUS

JaMDuDe wrote:

Marconius Wells was an atheist. He said it himself.

As skruples relies on, everything is incredible chance. But some things are beyond chance.
Heres an easier way to understand it.

The odds of the laws of physics being the way they are are the same as u throwing a dart from outer space and hitting a bullseye thats one trillionth of a trillionth of an inch in diameter.(i think me and rawkfist got the same book)

The odds of life spontaneously appearing on earth are the same as u finding a winning lottery ticket on the street every week for one thousand years. Those arent good odds.

The universe exploding out of nothing for no reason and ending up in perfect order isnt what id call a reasonable answer.

The fossil evidence of evolution is mud skippers and birds and 2 inch skull fossils that have 98% clay bodies based on what they should look like.

ITS NOT 100% FAITH BASED  Its based on historical fact and people writing things that came true hundreds sometimes thousands of years before they happened. The only explanation for this is that they could be interpeted a bunch of different ways and arent detailed or were written after it happened. None of these are true.

ARGUMENT FROM INTELLIGENCE
(1) Look, there's really no point in me trying to explain the whole thing to you stupid Atheists — it's too complicated for you to understand. God exists whether you like it or not.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
Wow - you have absolutely know historical knowledge of the bible whatseover - or you've left your brain in bed. One of the two. Do ANY of those texts look remotely like they were written by a bystander? What was the chance of ANY of the 'gospel writers' (we don't even know really who they were!) actually MET Jesus?

"The fossil evidence of evolution is mud skippers and birds and 2 inch skull fossils that have 98% clay bodies based on what they should look like."

That is a very nice example of what I would call an 'ad hominem' attack - an attack without any thought - rather like a monkey. Isn't it strange that if creationists focus on all the dodgier pieces of evidence - the ones that evolutionists know aren't too good. They never focus on the REAL pieces of evidence - like trilobites.


There are many similar traits in religions spanning different times and continents.  Up until very recent times        ( historically speaking ) it is been fashionable to believe in all sorts of Gods.

     There's stronger historical proof that religion has been used as a political tool to establish a hierarchy than there is historical proof that any miracles occurred that could be proven. Jesus was certainly a man who lived and died. He may have been a profound man, but he was a man.
     The fraud began when the apostles established the first Papalcy. It was a agreed upon line of succession, mostly set up to consolidate power and confine it to the Catholic church.

     I sometimes get dragged to church by my wife. I always chuckle when the preacher starts in about how only man has a soul, animals can't go to heaven...blah blah blah.

     The widely accepted notion that only man of all living things has a soul proves to me beyond a doubt that humans are still stupid and ego driven and primitive.

     I believe that history will look back on this era as one of technology bound and chained by archaic beliefs in silly myths that prevented social and economic development.
     Yes I am talking about religion.

NO RELIGION KNOW PEACE

For once I agree with you. Religion seems to be a very, very useful way to get money - the Catholic Church is sitting on hundreds of billions of REAL money (gold and the such). Literally!

The odds of life spontaneously appearing on earth are the same as u finding a winning lottery ticket on the street every week for one thousand years. Those arent good odds.

This clearly shows that you haven't done ANY research about the anthropic principle - please do, it is one of the major theories in modern physics. I'm talking about the weak one - I don't paticularly like the strong one. Oh, and the interesting thing about natural selection: It doesn't just apply to the biological world - BF2 has taken a liking to it!

A very nice article on NEW evolution.

You posted a link, if I recall correctly, claiming that changes in genes would not benefit an organism. Well - this would make you and your 'link' the laughingstock of the agricultural world. GENETIC MODIFICATION! READ! RESEARCH! LEARN HOW IT WORKS!

Oh - one very interesting, and crucial fact about evolution that is not brilliantly understood - everyone 'swims in the same gene pool'. If a favourable gene trait appears in one organism - then that gene quickly appears in the entire gene 'pool'. We don't know how it works - as we don't understand the proteins that make cells work in the first place.

As for the universe - yes, I know this is merely shifting the responsibility to somewhere else - but the multiverse theory comes out perfect in this situation. Read the work of Stephen Hawking - his black hole work especially explains how universes could be formed (I won't bother to delve into details).

I don't think its really fair to ask 'well where did the multiverse come from?' - we have enough problems trying to understand OUR universe and OUR dimension - lets not complicate things with trying to understand others with which we have little connection (apart from a few stray electrons doing things they really, really shouldn't. Like 'intefering' with a vacuum.)
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
JaMDuDe
Member
+69|7033
A lot of the books of the bible say who wrote them.

The multi-universe concept is purely made up. Theres no good proof of it. They just made it up cause our universe couldnt happen by chance if its the only one. Maybe you should try this one

Last edited by JaMDuDe (2006-05-11 08:51:31)

yerded
Bertinator
+255|6892|Westminster, California
People always say the universe couldn't exist without a God. Maybe. The debate perhaps should be better focused on whether God is still represented here on Earth. I would say that if HE exists HE is not.
     Would it be the boy raping catholics? The insane muslims? The cousin fucking polygamist mormons? Who exactly has earned the right through morality to claim to represent God?
     Also, the Bible makes perfect sense if you never look farther than that.
     When viewed through the lense of historical analysis and the evolution of religions as a tool of public manipulation it easy to dismiss the whole lot as fools business.
     I read the bible, I challenge all bible believers to read non biased books on the history of world religion.

Last edited by yerded (2006-05-11 16:48:06)

Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6930|Canberra, AUS

JaMDuDe wrote:

A lot of the books of the bible say who wrote them.

The multi-universe concept is purely made up. Theres no good proof of it. They just made it up cause our universe couldnt happen by chance if its the only one. Maybe you should try this one
Once again - you make a huge attack-assumption based on nothing. Wave particle duality? Quantum physics? Black holes? All these things help point to a multiverse. You have no right to say 'there is no proof' when you haven't bothered to look.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
JaMDuDe
Member
+69|7033
I didnt say "theres no proof" i said there is no good proof. Just because they want there to be many universes doesnt mean there are.
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,979|6888|949

Just because you want to believe in God doesn't mean there is.
ATC
Member
+58|7000|...

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

Just because you want to believe in God doesn't mean there is.
It's called faith.
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,979|6888|949

Aslan_the_Creator wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

Just because you want to believe in God doesn't mean there is.
It's called faith.
Right, and everyone is entitled to there own, no?  So why are people refusing to allow that there may be no God?  You have faith in God, I have faith in no God.  What is the difference, and how is anyone allowed to say that one is wrong or right?
JaMDuDe
Member
+69|7033
Why are you on a battlefield forum topal? Shouldnt you be reading an encyclopedia or sumthing?
Erkut.hv
Member
+124|6991|California

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

Just because you want to believe in God doesn't mean there is.
And just because you refuse to believe does not mean there is not.

I think we should all agree to disagree on this one, as we are going in circles at this point.
Marconius
One-eyed Wonder Mod
+368|6950|San Francisco

JaMDuDe wrote:

Why are you on a battlefield forum topal? Shouldnt you be reading an encyclopedia or sumthing?
And with this said, it can be concluded that it is absolutely futile to keep talking to JamDude, expecting an intelligent debate from his represented side.  This has definitely been a wild and crazy thread, and religious discussion always is as such, and it only gets better when you have proper educated people on both sides of the argument going at it.
topal63
. . .
+533|6974

Erkut.hv wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

Just because you want to believe in God doesn't mean there is.
And just because you refuse to believe does not mean there is not.

I think we should all agree to disagree on this one, as we are going in circles at this point.
I don't agree - that is a childish attitude - and nothing more.

The point is more subtle and yet easily discernable -  this so-called veil of "faith" - that presupposes that the veil cannot be lifted - and what it means [faith/belief] is on the discussion table - it keeps coming up and offered as a shield.

I say it can be defined and its impenetrability is a false assumption.

Last edited by topal63 (2006-05-12 10:52:23)

yerded
Bertinator
+255|6892|Westminster, California

Marconius wrote:

JaMDuDe wrote:

Why are you on a battlefield forum topal? Shouldnt you be reading an encyclopedia or sumthing?
And with this said, it can be concluded that it is absolutely futile to keep talking to JamDude, expecting an intelligent debate from his represented side.  This has definitely been a wild and crazy thread, and religious discussion always is as such, and it only gets better when you have proper educated people on both sides of the argument going at it.
Hey Marconius, your a smart guy, Why don't you shed some light on the historical evolution of religion. It's pointless to debate the bible with zealots, and it's pointless to debate spirituality with an aetheist.
     What about the commonalities of different religions within a societal evolutionary view? Let's look before Christ at religion in general, its origins,effects and fallout.
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6930|Canberra, AUS

JaMDuDe wrote:

I didnt say "theres no proof" i said there is no good proof. Just because they want there to be many universes doesnt mean there are.
Scientists have a lot better things to do than to make up theories to prove creationists wrong - they have nuch bigger questions on their minds. As you learn more and more about this field of physics (particle/quantum physics esp.) you will realise more that this theory makes a lot of sense.

Or maybe not for you: you don't seem to be able to absorb anything that hints at a non-literal interpretation of Genesis.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6930|Canberra, AUS

yerded wrote:

Marconius wrote:

JaMDuDe wrote:

Why are you on a battlefield forum topal? Shouldnt you be reading an encyclopedia or sumthing?
And with this said, it can be concluded that it is absolutely futile to keep talking to JamDude, expecting an intelligent debate from his represented side.  This has definitely been a wild and crazy thread, and religious discussion always is as such, and it only gets better when you have proper educated people on both sides of the argument going at it.
Hey Marconius, your a smart guy, Why don't you shed some light on the historical evolution of religion. It's pointless to debate the bible with zealots, and it's pointless to debate spirituality with an aetheist.
     What about the commonalities of different religions within a societal evolutionary view? Let's look before Christ at religion in general, its origins,effects and fallout.
Well, this is the closest link I could come up with - I can't see a page exploring the similarities between religions (and trust me, there are MANY.)

Last edited by Spark (2006-05-13 00:43:29)

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6907|USA

Marconius wrote:

JaMDuDe wrote:

Why are you on a battlefield forum topal? Shouldnt you be reading an encyclopedia or sumthing?
And with this said, it can be concluded that it is absolutely futile to keep talking to JamDude, expecting an intelligent debate from his represented side.  This has definitely been a wild and crazy thread, and religious discussion always is as such, and it only gets better when you have proper educated people on both sides of the argument going at it.
My question is this.................Who is REALLY educated or have facts about what happens to us  or our soul ( if we have one ) when we die?..........the answer...............nobody, not even the pope or marconius or jamdude. there is no inteligance that goes along with discussing things that nobody has experianced and lived to talk about or share. We will alllllll find out soon enough.
yerded
Bertinator
+255|6892|Westminster, California

lowing wrote:

Marconius wrote:

JaMDuDe wrote:

Why are you on a battlefield forum topal? Shouldnt you be reading an encyclopedia or sumthing?
And with this said, it can be concluded that it is absolutely futile to keep talking to JamDude, expecting an intelligent debate from his represented side.  This has definitely been a wild and crazy thread, and religious discussion always is as such, and it only gets better when you have proper educated people on both sides of the argument going at it.
My question is this.................Who is REALLY educated or have facts about what happens to us  or our soul ( if we have one ) when we die?..........the answer...............nobody, not even the pope or marconius or jamdude. there is no inteligance that goes along with discussing things that nobody has experianced and lived to talk about or share. We will alllllll find out soon enough.
Thats got to be the christ forsaken goddamnedest most intelligently designed thing said so far. + points for lowing everybody, on me...
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6930|Canberra, AUS
Clearly you haven't seen some of Skruples and mine's earlier work
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6907|USA

topal63 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Marconius wrote:


And with this said, it can be concluded that it is absolutely futile to keep talking to JamDude, expecting an intelligent debate from his represented side.  This has definitely been a wild and crazy thread, and religious discussion always is as such, and it only gets better when you have proper educated people on both sides of the argument going at it.
My question is this.................Who is REALLY educated or have facts about what happens to us  or our soul ( if we have one ) when we die?..........the answer...............nobody, not even the pope or marconius or jamdude. there is no inteligance that goes along with discussing things that nobody has experianced and lived to talk about or share. We will alllllll find out soon enough.
You are as wrong. . . as the others:

You can discuss it. . .

You can define what you can know/do know. . .

You can discuss spirituality with an atheist (either spirit is; or spirit is not; either way both groups are in the SAME ACTUAL spiritual vessel of NOT KNOWING in any CERTAIN SENSE as to what is the meta-physcial?). . .
Meta-physics is the extension of the physical (what we do know can know) into a system of what might be; that beyond the mask of reality (but it BETTER point back to the REAL in some sense. This is why most people of reason object to the meta-physical systems of super-nature found in religion; it is disconnected from the real; utterly too unreal & often impossible; or literal when it shouldn't be; its extensions from the physical to the meta-physical are utterly broken - as a figure of speech). . .

.
.
.

What is soul? Is easily rendered to that [something] which is unaffected by reality. As everything you actually might associate to soul should be associated to BRAIN: personality, memory, happiness, personal bonds, thinking, wondering, logic, fear, all emotions, all thought, all systems of belief, etc; they are all contained in the vessel of the BRAIN (and its systems, functions); not the suspect notion of soul (if we are talking about soul; when the concept/idea is utterly unexamined in any sense).

You emote from the BRAIN then call it SOUL. Damage the BRAIN and every mind-brain-aspect previsously listed can be totally destroyed. Whittle away at a mind (the BRAIN) and you are removing a person one piece at a time until nothing is left. THIS IS A FACT. My grandmother died last Wednesday night, after a 2 week fight with pneumonia, she had advanced Alzheimer's - she did not even know where she was, me, nor any of her own children. I saw her lose her faith in god - not because she lost faith - it was taken away in it's entirety by the disease Alzheimer's, bit by bit; until she no longer had her comfort [her faith], she did not even know that she ever was a Christain; then she did not know she ever was a grandmother; the she did not know she ever was a mother - then she died.

If there is a soul it is utterly disconnected from the REAL aspects of everything we associate with/to spirituality: faith (requires learning it - thus requires a brain - thus requires faculity to keep it), the emotions of compassion, altruism and any worlview crisis associated to it (requires a brain, and a continued & good biological working order of it); etc (all thought, all emotion). Without even getting logically techincal about it - it is easy to see that nothing REAL can be associated to soul; nothing not even our spirtual sense, unique personalities, emotions and/or systems (these require brain). If there is such a thing as soul it is unnaffected by reality; as it relates to who I am in every sense of the real ME - the one hear and now - the emergent/becomming that is the personality - I AM. I think therefore I AM - I emote therefore I AM - I am brain.

And that only means the meta-physical system & belief (philosophy, theology) surrounding the concept of soul - as it it streams from super-nature spirtual systems - seems to be utterly discordant within it's own relgio-philosophical meta-system.

And this holds true for any nonsensical meta-physical-system or belief associated to you as energy (the quantum particles that make up - the you - the me). You are NOT the energy that you are made out of - you are the pattern sustained/replaced within the vessel of energy (I am guessing at the # here, but I think it's about every 3 years - nearly every [or all] molecule[s]/atom[s]/energy-particle[s] in your body has [have] been replaced). You are not the atoms that make you up - you are the pattern that is sustained/repaired/or that persists within (while the energy is moving in and out). When the body dies the energy is not converted - it is simply changed in biological form to inert potential for other life to use - and the emergent pattern (the you) dissappears. This is why it is difficult to construct a meaningful meta-physical extension of reality based upon old 4-corner world thinking & ideas.
Can I have a hit off of whatever it is you are smoking??
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6907|USA

Spark wrote:

Clearly you haven't seen some of Skruples and mine's earlier work
Sorry Spark if I repeated your thoughts...........I gotta be honest and admit that I didn't go back and read all 47 pages to this thread.

Last edited by lowing (2006-05-13 20:20:39)

JaMDuDe
Member
+69|7033
Do you have some sort of philosophical weed or sumthing?
Xietsu
Banned
+50|6812
Yeah...well...I'm religious in no way, shape, or form, but I'd like to start off with this query of mine...

Did any initial religious teachings (particular to monotheism) have an attributed method behind creation of what is?

If so, who was described as being the messenger of these relative concepts?

Last edited by Xietsu (2006-05-16 14:47:53)

JaMDuDe
Member
+69|7033
Sometimes your physical conscious state can change, but your grandma was still the same person. The body & mind work together, if she has a disease that takes her memory away then her body will not work the same way as it used to. It also can go the other way around. Do you believe you have free will if what shapes and controls our mind completely is genetics and our environment?

Evolution is not fact.

Theres plenty of evidence that the books are accurate.

You should go read 1 Corinthians 2:14 and Romans 1:23



Im not even sure of what your asking Xietsu

Last edited by JaMDuDe (2006-05-16 14:45:06)

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard