Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6376|North Carolina

JaMDuDe wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

JaMDuDe wrote:


No atheist cares about odds. If they used common sense with odds they wouldnt be atheists.
I would argue common sense leads one to agnosticism.  No one can verify or disprove the existence of a god or gods.  It is simply not within the realm of human comprehension, and therefore, a moot point.
Thats why God inspired his own book, because it is beyond human comprehension alone. But of course you can argue against every single sentence in the bible until youve asked more questions than there are answers. Following agnosticism or christianity is a personal decision and not one that is answered by common sense.
Quite the contrary...  Agnosticism makes more sense than Christianity.  I say this because the Bible being written or inspired by a deity is debatable, whereas it is quite certain that humans at least put the words to papyrus.  Therefore, if common sense is defined as following only that which is empirically determinable, then faith does not enter the picture at all.
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6376|North Carolina

ATG wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

JaMDuDe wrote:


No atheist cares about odds. If they used common sense with odds they wouldnt be atheists.
I would argue common sense leads one to agnosticism.  No one can verify or disprove the existence of a god or gods.  It is simply not within the realm of human comprehension, and therefore, a moot point.
Brilliant.
Thanks, ATG... 
JaMDuDe
Member
+69|6748

Turquoise wrote:

JaMDuDe wrote:

Turquoise wrote:


I would argue common sense leads one to agnosticism.  No one can verify or disprove the existence of a god or gods.  It is simply not within the realm of human comprehension, and therefore, a moot point.
Thats why God inspired his own book, because it is beyond human comprehension alone. But of course you can argue against every single sentence in the bible until youve asked more questions than there are answers. Following agnosticism or christianity is a personal decision and not one that is answered by common sense.
Quite the contrary...  Agnosticism makes more sense than Christianity.  I say this because the Bible being written or inspired by a deity is debatable, whereas it is quite certain that humans at least put the words to papyrus.  Therefore, if common sense is defined as following only that which is empirically determinable, then faith does not enter the picture at all.
I dont define common sense as only believing in that which you can test. Common sense is not gona lead you away from a book like the Bible.
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6376|North Carolina

JaMDuDe wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

JaMDuDe wrote:


Thats why God inspired his own book, because it is beyond human comprehension alone. But of course you can argue against every single sentence in the bible until youve asked more questions than there are answers. Following agnosticism or christianity is a personal decision and not one that is answered by common sense.
Quite the contrary...  Agnosticism makes more sense than Christianity.  I say this because the Bible being written or inspired by a deity is debatable, whereas it is quite certain that humans at least put the words to papyrus.  Therefore, if common sense is defined as following only that which is empirically determinable, then faith does not enter the picture at all.
I dont define common sense as only believing in that which you can test. Common sense is not gona lead you away from a book like the Bible.
How do you define common sense then?
ghettoperson
Member
+1,943|6620

common sense 
sound practical judgment that is independent of specialized knowledge, training, or the like; normal native intelligence.
[Origin: 1525–35; trans. of L sēnsus commūnis, itself trans. of Gk koin aísthēsis]

—Related forms
common-sense, com‧mon‧sense, adjective
com‧mon‧sen‧si‧cal, com‧mon‧sen‧si‧ble, adjective
com‧mon‧sen‧si‧cal‧ly, com‧mon‧sen‧si‧bly, adverb
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.0.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6376|North Carolina
I also define it as such, and therefore, I have not yet seen the practical worth of Christianity.  How is believing in something you cannot fully understand practical?
JaMDuDe
Member
+69|6748

Turquoise wrote:

I also define it as such, and therefore, I have not yet seen the practical worth of Christianity.  How is believing in something you cannot fully understand practical?
We dont fully understand a lot of things(the universe, gravity, the human body to name a few). We dont know everything about God, but we have enough to practically have faith in him. If you want it go read the bible and go to church. Or you can make a PERSONAL choice not to. Common sense isnt leading you away, your own decision is.
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6376|North Carolina

JaMDuDe wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

I also define it as such, and therefore, I have not yet seen the practical worth of Christianity.  How is believing in something you cannot fully understand practical?
We dont fully understand a lot of things(the universe, gravity, the human body to name a few). We dont know everything about God, but we have enough to practically have faith in him. If you want it go read the bible and go to church. Or you can make a PERSONAL choice not to. Common sense isnt leading you away, your own decision is.
True, but there is no mathematical or empirical way to determine a deity's existence, while the other things you mentioned at least have a tangible component to them.

Nonetheless, I understand what you are saying, but to me, choosing a religion is like making a total shot in the dark.  How does someone pick one religion over another?  I suppose if I had to make that choice, I'd probably be a Buddhist.
ghettoperson
Member
+1,943|6620

Yeah, Buddists get cool orange rodes, and are all teh pwnz0rs at tae kwon do. Damn Christianity and it's unexcitingness...
Paco_the_Insane
Phorum Phantom
+244|6615|Ohio

Turquoise wrote:

JaMDuDe wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

I also define it as such, and therefore, I have not yet seen the practical worth of Christianity.  How is believing in something you cannot fully understand practical?
We dont fully understand a lot of things(the universe, gravity, the human body to name a few). We dont know everything about God, but we have enough to practically have faith in him. If you want it go read the bible and go to church. Or you can make a PERSONAL choice not to. Common sense isnt leading you away, your own decision is.
True, but there is no mathematical or empirical way to determine a deity's existence, while the other things you mentioned at least have a tangible component to them.

Nonetheless, I understand what you are saying, but to me, choosing a religion is like making a total shot in the dark.  How does someone pick one religion over another?  I suppose if I had to make that choice, I'd probably be a Buddhist.
Hey, its better to believe in God and have him not exist, than to be an athiest and then have him exist
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6376|North Carolina

Paco_the_Insane wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

JaMDuDe wrote:


We dont fully understand a lot of things(the universe, gravity, the human body to name a few). We dont know everything about God, but we have enough to practically have faith in him. If you want it go read the bible and go to church. Or you can make a PERSONAL choice not to. Common sense isnt leading you away, your own decision is.
True, but there is no mathematical or empirical way to determine a deity's existence, while the other things you mentioned at least have a tangible component to them.

Nonetheless, I understand what you are saying, but to me, choosing a religion is like making a total shot in the dark.  How does someone pick one religion over another?  I suppose if I had to make that choice, I'd probably be a Buddhist.
Hey, its better to believe in God and have him not exist, than to be an athiest and then have him exist
lol... True, I know you're probably being a bit facetious in saying that, but think about that for just a moment.  It seems like a lot of people actually follow Christianity and other religions for similar reasons.  There is this inherent fear of damnation that comes with disbelief.  In a way, it's like a contest among religions to come up with the most painful punishment for not believing so as to encourage people to join them.  Christianity is perhaps the most famous for its version of punishment.  I wouldn't doubt it if this is a lot of the reason why some people convert.  Yet, what does this really accomplish?

Following something out of fear of eternal damnation otherwise seems like a very dishonest and hollow way to believe in something.  I can't help but suspect this was somewhat intentional in the design of Christianity.
jimmanycricket
EBC Member
+56|6626|Cambridge, England
hm, interesting, i dont know what to make of that really.

Isnt the bible enough withoput all these codes and stuff.

This sort of hype is generally bad for the chritian faith as a whole.

The codes get disproved and people think that that means that christianity is wrong.

Dont use some code to base your religion on.
JaMDuDe
Member
+69|6748

Turquoise wrote:

JaMDuDe wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

I also define it as such, and therefore, I have not yet seen the practical worth of Christianity.  How is believing in something you cannot fully understand practical?
We dont fully understand a lot of things(the universe, gravity, the human body to name a few). We dont know everything about God, but we have enough to practically have faith in him. If you want it go read the bible and go to church. Or you can make a PERSONAL choice not to. Common sense isnt leading you away, your own decision is.
True, but there is no mathematical or empirical way to determine a deity's existence, while the other things you mentioned at least have a tangible component to them.

Nonetheless, I understand what you are saying, but to me, choosing a religion is like making a total shot in the dark.  How does someone pick one religion over another?  I suppose if I had to make that choice, I'd probably be a Buddhist.
There might be a mathematical way to do it but i dont know it. COMPLETE randomness would not produce the kind of universe we have. IMO if there were no God or anything out there, there would be nothing. Christianity is far different from any other religion. No other religions have hundreds of prophecies that have come true. They arent as historically accurate as christianity. The things Jesus did were in public and eye witnesses who wanted to accurately record history wrote down what they saw. Christianity has billions of happy *peaceful* followers. America was based on it, now its the strongest, richest, happiest nation on earth. The differences go on and on and on. If you do all the research and read all the books christianity is far different than any other religion(other than judaism because their books are in the bible).
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6376|North Carolina

JaMDuDe wrote:

There might be a mathematical way to do it but i dont know it. COMPLETE randomness would not produce the kind of universe we have. IMO if there were no God or anything out there, there would be nothing. Christianity is far different from any other religion. No other religions have hundreds of prophecies that have come true. They arent as historically accurate as christianity. The things Jesus did were in public and eye witnesses who wanted to accurately record history wrote down what they saw. Christianity has billions of happy *peaceful* followers. America was based on it, now its the strongest, richest, happiest nation on earth. The differences go on and on and on. If you do all the research and read all the books christianity is far different than any other religion(other than judaism because their books are in the bible).
Note that I'm not saying there is no god or gods.  I'm saying that humans have no way of determining the answer to this most intriguing question.  To commit to a religion is, in all practical respects, putting more faith in a book or ideas than in the actual deity involved.  You essentially are following the words of other humans in your pursuit of god, which seems odd considering none of us can really know this being.

Some of what you have stated could apply to Islam and Hinduism as well, by the way.

America's primacy is the result of economics, geography, technology, and capitalism.  Religion has little to do with it.  Regardless, empires come and go, as do religions.  There was a time when the Egyptians were one of the most powerful cultures on Earth.  Then came the Romans.  The Chinese and Indians were at the top of their game at one point, but then came European colonialism and the Industrial Revolution.  This is all part of a big cycle, and it's quite likely that Christianity may not even exist in another 1,000 years.  With all the uncertainty in the world, I wouldn't use America's current state as any indication of the validity of Christianity.
jarhedch
Member
+12|6641|Aberdeen, Uk, SF Bay Area 1st

Turquoise wrote:

Considering the Bible's earliest chapters were handed down through an oral tradition
Good post, nonetheless....
Who's oral tradition is that? And where did you glean this info?
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6376|North Carolina

jarhedch wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Considering the Bible's earliest chapters were handed down through an oral tradition
Good post, nonetheless....
Who's oral tradition is that? And where did you glean this info?
It's a generally accepted fact that almost all ancient religions began as an oral tradition.  Stories were passed down generation to generation through speech.  Actually writing down these stories usually did not occur until centuries down the line.  Many theologians believe the oldest parts of Judaism are derived from Zoroastrianism, which was around at the same time as Judaism and had an oral tradition of its own.  There are many similarities between the two.

Also, every culture has a context.  Religions do not begin in a cultural vacuum.  The interpretation of events is greatly affected by tradition.  Some of the earliest religions in the Fertile Crescent believed that the sporadic flooding of the Tigris and Euphrates were the result of a vengeful or temperamental god.  Other facts of daily life affected the development of ideas within Judaism and later...  Christianity.

Last edited by Turquoise (2006-10-15 14:34:01)

Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6552|SE London

JaMDuDe wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

JaMDuDe wrote:


We dont fully understand a lot of things(the universe, gravity, the human body to name a few). We dont know everything about God, but we have enough to practically have faith in him. If you want it go read the bible and go to church. Or you can make a PERSONAL choice not to. Common sense isnt leading you away, your own decision is.
True, but there is no mathematical or empirical way to determine a deity's existence, while the other things you mentioned at least have a tangible component to them.

Nonetheless, I understand what you are saying, but to me, choosing a religion is like making a total shot in the dark.  How does someone pick one religion over another?  I suppose if I had to make that choice, I'd probably be a Buddhist.
There might be a mathematical way to do it but i dont know it. COMPLETE randomness would not produce the kind of universe we have. IMO if there were no God or anything out there, there would be nothing. Christianity is far different from any other religion. No other religions have hundreds of prophecies that have come true. They arent as historically accurate as christianity. The things Jesus did were in public and eye witnesses who wanted to accurately record history wrote down what they saw. Christianity has billions of happy *peaceful* followers. America was based on it, now its the strongest, richest, happiest nation on earth. The differences go on and on and on. If you do all the research and read all the books christianity is far different than any other religion(other than judaism because their books are in the bible).
Why wouldn't complete randomness lead to a universe like ours?

Cleverer people than you have suggested that could well have been the case. But then I don't suppose you read a lot of scientific literature.

I can't see how anyone could ever bring common sense into a debate about Christianity, which stems from a belief in a personalised deity. Any personal deity is an absurd notion, much like ancient Pagan beliefs.

I really can't see how anyone with any common sense could believe in a personalised deity like 'god'. You might just as well believe in a pantheon of gods like the ancient Greeks or the Aztecs. Why should Christianity be right and those religions wrong?

Christianity is not different to other religions. Christianity is almost identical to Islam and Judaism, they are all essentially the same belief system, worshipping the same god.

Americas success is in no way connected to religion. It is not granted by god, rather by the hard work of it's leaders and inhabitants. American manufacturing gained the US it's place as a superpower. The Romans did very well too, they weren't Christian - not until Constantine converted, shortly before the Roman empire collapsed.
JaMDuDe
Member
+69|6748

Bertster7 wrote:

Cleverer people than you have suggested that could well have been the case. But then I don't suppose you read a lot of scientific literature.
I read next to no scientific literature, im still working on my first year of high school

If youve read and done all the research about christianity and religion in general youd know zeus and God are not the same. Your free to believe no christians have common sense, even though its not true and some of the worlds best scientists have been christian. Im gona stop debating here because i feel like this will turn into an everyone vs me thread soon.
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6376|North Carolina

JaMDuDe wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

Cleverer people than you have suggested that could well have been the case. But then I don't suppose you read a lot of scientific literature.
I read next to no scientific literature, im still working on my first year of high school
I don't want to sound patronizing here, but you're participating better in this debate than I probably would have at your age.
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6552|SE London

JaMDuDe wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

Cleverer people than you have suggested that could well have been the case. But then I don't suppose you read a lot of scientific literature.
I read next to no scientific literature, im still working on my first year of high school

If youve read and done all the research about christianity and religion in general youd know zeus and God are not the same. Your free to believe no christians have common sense, even though its not true and some of the worlds best scientists have been christian. Im gona stop debating here because i feel like this will turn into an everyone vs me thread soon.
You're still in your first year of high school?

That explains a lot.

Personalised deities are an easy way out. A simple explaination for something so complex it might as well be inexplicable. There is an answer for everything, it's just a case of finding out what it is.

I'd seriously recommend you go out and read a few books like 'The Road to Reality' by Roger Penrose. IMO the best and most complete scientific work ever. If you find that too heavy going, try a 'A Brief History of Time', it's a bit overly simplified and a bit outdated but still makes a great read. Much more relevant than the bible, which I have read, long ago.
liquix
Member
+51|6425|Peoples Republic of Portland

JaMDuDe wrote:

eagles1106 wrote:

Indeed fascinating, 1 in 4 million of it being chance
They converted it into english though so it could be read.  In its native language the same grids appear.
No atheist cares about odds. If they used common sense with odds they wouldnt be atheists.
< activates common sense powers >

Wow, it makes way more sense that an invisible man created everything in the universe in a few days. He was even genius enough place fossils of extinct animals from his perfect plan. He even told what happened to some lucky individuals so they wrote it down in a book! What's even better is that he forgot to tell them about all of the  people living in the rest of the world, hell who ever heard about the Americas anyways!

Boy, do I love "common sense."

PS: I hang a picture of a Scandinavian Jesus over my fireplace, because we all know how many people from the middle east have blue eyes and white skin.

Last edited by liquix (2006-10-15 16:10:40)

UON
Junglist Massive
+223|6624
There's another message:

1) make a grid 200x100
2) populate it with letters selected from Deuteronomy using the Fibonacci sequence (0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, etc.), starting each row from the next number in the sequence
3) overlay a Fibonacci sequence spiral as found in nature (particularly sea shells, perhaps a clue?) as shown below:

https://www.mcs.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/R.Knott/Fibonacci/fibSpiralANIM.gif

4) Then read from the grid the letters which the spiral produced passes through:

https://www.mcs.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/R.Knott/Fibonacci/fibspiral2.GIF

I think it's just a coincidence, but make your minds up yourself:

Code:

anything believe you'll this believe you <--
d4rkst4r
biggie smalls
+72|6424|Ontario, Canada
God made the Bible in a way which humans will not know what will happen next, thus forcing you to have faith in the Bible, and not knowing whats going to happen next.
"you know life is what we make it, and a chance is like a picture, it'd be nice if you just take it"
UON
Junglist Massive
+223|6624

d4rkst4r wrote:

God made the Bible in a way which humans will not know what will happen next, thus forcing you to have faith in the Bible, and not knowing whats going to happen next.
He told you that Himself?  https://img516.imageshack.us/img516/728/smiletfhna8.png
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6526

d4rkst4r wrote:

God made the Bible in a way which humans will not know what will happen next, thus forcing you to have faith in the Bible, and not knowing whats going to happen next.
A) Did he use Microsoft WordTM to 'make the bible'?
B) If his technique 'forced people to have faith in the bible' then where did he go wrong with me?
C) How does making something cryptic or open-ended force someone to have 'faith' in it? What was in the suitcase in Pulp Fiction? We'll never know - should I have faith in Quentin Tarantino?
D) For a book that you describe as being written 'in a way which humans will not know what will happen next' it contains a hell of a lot of silly prophecies and other hocum...

Last edited by CameronPoe (2006-10-15 17:10:43)

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard