Time for a rant about Jesus.
How did that guy get so many titles. Here are a few:
The Messiah
Christ
Son of God
God made Man
Brother of God
Uncle of God
Second Cousin Twice Removed of God
Giver of life after death
The Resurrection
The guy who never sinned
etceteraaaaaa
Ok, so Jesus performed a few miracles according to the Bible.
One of those is the ability to walk on water. That's fucking scary. Imagine you lying on the beach getting a tan and suddenly a long-haired, bearded man walks towards you on the ocean. Wouldn't you be freaked out?
Then he says "Don't be afraid"...
So Jesus lies next to you and says "watch dis, yo", then he performs his next miracle. Shazzam! The water in the ocean has now changed to wine.
That's a pretty shit miracle, changing water into wine. Is that to suggest we should drink alcohol (which induces sinful behaviour) instead of drinking pure water? Nice logic there, Mr. Retard who wrote the bible.
Why did Jesus get crucified anyway. Did he get sentenced for never sinning? What a crime. A more logical reason for execution would be witchcraft. At least those Roman douchebags have a sensible reason for executing Jesus. And it would be a kind of a logical reason for resurrection.
Church also sucks. What idiot came up with the idea with the bread and wine being the Body and Blood of Jesus? I mean, the world population could have ate 1000 times the amount his body in one day of church services.
That was a joke, it obviously doesn't mean the exact body of jesus. But it's a pretty crap symbolic idea. Bread is weak and can be broken easily. Is that to suggest Jesus' body/mind was fragile and easily breakable? Some respect the church is paying. Wine representing blood? Is that to suggest Jesus had a permanent OTT blood alcohol content?
How did Jesus remove all sin anyway? He died and got resurrected, big whoop, that didn't do shit. It didn't stop terrorism or wars or anything.
Jesus and the Bible is a load of bullshit.
Do you agree? Discuss.
I totally disagree with u but ur allowed ur opinion but ur right about churches the whole of christendom is evil. its very complicated though
Quote from: Bakster on September 09, 2005, 09:16:45 PM
Jesus and the Bible is a load of bullshit.
Please if you are going to express your views, do so in a less offensive way. A comment like this will just piss people off.
Secondly you must have attended 1 day of church to come here and bitch about things that I clearly understood when I used to participate in service.....as a young child.
Quote from: Bakster on September 09, 2005, 09:16:45 PM
That's a pretty shit miracle, changing water into wine. Is that to suggest we should drink alcohol (which induces sinful behaviour) instead of drinking pure water? Nice logic there, Mr. Retard who wrote the bible.
Take into note the time difference here.... And also the bible is made of many from many different people, hence the different chapters. So there is no single "Mr. Retard".
Quote from: Bakster on September 09, 2005, 09:16:45 PM
Why did Jesus get crucified anyway. Did he get sentenced for never sinning? What a crime. A more logical reason for execution would be witchcraft. At least those Roman douchebags have a sensible reason for executing Jesus. And it would be a kind of a logical reason for resurrection.
Ok so here you have not only contradicted yourself, but you are implying the Romans always had a good reason to kill someone. I am not stating that anything is true, but I will say what is believed in Christianity.
Again note the time difference, in those times people with different ideas were killed or excommunicated for having different ideas. If I recall correctly, the Bible says Jesus taught his own sermons and went around preaching his word. I don't think this was fully accepted by the government so they crucified him.
Now for your contradiction. At the end of your post you claim "the Bible is bullshit", implying it's not true, but then here you use an event told in the Bible(the resurrection) to justify Jesus not being what the Bible says?
QuoteThat was a joke, it obviously doesn't mean the exact body of Jesus. But it's a pretty crap symbolic idea. Bread is weak and can be broken easily. Is that to suggest Jesus' body/mind was fragile and easily breakable? Some respect the church is paying. Wine representing blood? Is that to suggest Jesus had a permanent OTT blood alcohol content?
I forget the reason I have heard for the body and blood of Christ being bread and wine. But the way I think it could have been was that bread and wine were a large part of what people had back then. Bread was what helped people survive and kept them alive, maybe trying to say Jesus symbolizes that? Though like I said I'm only guessing, I forget what the real reason is.
QuoteHow did Jesus remove all sin anyway? He died and got resurrected, big whoop, that didn't do shit. It didn't stop terrorism or wars or anything.
If everyone was a god-fearing Christian(following every commandment) then there wouldn't be any wars. I believe the Bible says that if you repent your sin, you will be forgiven.....so where did it say Jesus would stop people from sinning? Jesus is said to have been god's way of experiencing the human way of life, living and dieing as a human would.
Lastly noone said you have to be a Christian or believe in anything they say, so why are you going off on misinformed rants? Oh and by the way, I currently do not practice any religion, but you don't here me saying everyone who does believe in those ideas have their heads full of bullshit. I made this post to show you how much of a bigot you come off as.
First, if you want to discuss religious beliefs, please be respectful of the beliefs of other groups. Insulting and criticising accomplishes nothing. Having attended catholic grade and high school, I will be happy to answer your questions.
The Messiah - translated as "anointed". Jewish tradition speaks of a messiah who will restore the Kingdom of God. Christians see Jesus as this person
Christ- Greek word for Messiah
Son of God- Christians believe Jesus is the Son of God
God made Man- The Reincarnation of God made flesh here on earth.
Brother of God- Not used
Uncle of God- Not used
Second Cousin Twice Removed of God- Not used, grow up
Giver of life after death- Christians believe Jesus brings life through Resurrection, reappearance from after death
The Resurrection- Coming again after death to save the world.
The guy who never sinned- Slang term I suppose
"One of those is the ability to walk on water. That's fucking scary. Imagine you lying on the beach getting a tan and suddenly a long-haired, bearded man walks towards you on the ocean. Wouldn't you be freaked out?
Then he says "Don't be afraid"..."
The purpose of this passage is to show that Jesus has power over nature and trust in God is all you need. (Peter asked Jesus to call him, Peter walked out, but lost faith and started to drown.)
"So Jesus lies next to you and says "watch dis, yo", then he performs his next miracle. Shazzam! The water in the ocean has now changed to wine."
This was Jesus' first miracle at Cana. He was at a wedding, the wedding ran out of wine. His mother Mary asked Him to do something. Jesus said his time had not begun, but he followed his mother's request and changed jugs of water into wine.
"That's a pretty shit miracle, changing water into wine. Is that to suggest we should drink alcohol (which induces sinful behaviour) instead of drinking pure water? Nice logic there, Mr. Retard who wrote the bible."
Drinking is not a sin. Drinking to excess is. Those who can responsibly drink in celebration are alright. And Jesus never wrote the Bible.
"Why did Jesus get crucified anyway. Did he get sentenced for never sinning? What a crime. A more logical reason for execution would be witchcraft. At least those Roman douchebags have a sensible reason for executing Jesus. And it would be a kind of a logical reason for resurrection."
He was charged with blasphemy by the Jewish court, but since they were unable to execute Him, the Jews handed him over to the Roman Governor to be put on trial. Pilot, the governor, in order to please the crowds, had Jesus put to death for treason. The Inscription read INRI. Which translates into Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews.
"Church also sucks. What idiot came up with the idea with the bread and wine being the Body and Blood of Jesus? I mean, the world population could have ate 1000 times the amount his body in one day of church services.
That was a joke, it obviously doesn't mean the exact body of Jesus. But it's a pretty crap symbolic idea. Bread is weak and can be broken easily. Is that to suggest Jesus' body/mind was fragile and easily breakable? Some respect the church is paying. Wine representing blood? Is that to suggest Jesus had a permanent OTT blood alcohol content?"
Jesus himself instituted the Eucharist during the traditional Passover meal. Going back to ancient times, the Hebrews believed it to be a huge sin against God to drink blood; it was thought that a person would be taking the lifeforce of God if he drank blood. (The word for life and blood is the same) So when Jesus told his followers this is my body, this is my blood, He was giving himself fully those people. And he wanted the moment to be remembered.
"How did Jesus remove all sin anyway? He died and got resurrected, big whoop, that didn't do shit. It didn't stop terrorism or wars or anything."
The key concept to understand is that humans have free will. We have the capability to do good and evil, and God gives us the freedom to choose so. But Christians believe that believing in God and repenting for your sins will result in the forgiveness of sins and everlasting life. Jesus ended sin's rain over the world, no longer would humans perish but be granted new life.
Jesus and the Bible is a load of bullshit.
Please respect the religious beliefs of other people. I am going to assume you are not a theologian. So how can you make a claim that says 1.1 billion people in the world are wrong? All religious groups need to respect the beliefs of others and be more open to dialogue between the groups.
<edit>This really should be in off topic<edit>
<edit2>Thought of more stuff:
Truly it is possible to go through and nitpick through the faults and holes of each religion, but that serves no purpose. It's much better to look at the good aspects in what they can provide. Maybe it's not as applicable in your life today, but as people grow older, they tend to take a greater role in their faith life.
As my world history teacher most graciously said,
"It takes as much faith to believe in evolution as it does creationism."
And just so no one makes the foolish post saying, "but there is scientific evidence proving evolution." I must inform you that you are wrong. Evolution is THEORY, and will most likely always remain as such.
<edit2>
the last 2 comments are very good btw ur kinda on the right line about Jesus body and blood.
when Jesus said u must eat my body and drink my blood, when 1st said it made those false ones following Jesus stop following him which was a good thing obviously, then when Jesus said it the night before his death to his apostles at which is called "the lord's evening meal" he meant that people must eat his body and drink his blood, meaning take knowledge of him and believe in his sacrifice and act on it-no cannabalism invovled k.
thats what has been explained to me by my religion.
also, Jesus 1st miracle turning water into wine showed the balance of his life and shows that alchol was drunk by his disciples and others in the bible-point is some religions codemn drink i know its totally of talk but its another thought
thanks for your time guys
Bakster, there is "off topic" section. If you really wish I can also make "religion" section for you (joke)
<edit> actually, I can move threads :) So I moved it to "unrelated"
if u must
Pfft well I'm on Baksters side, only not so insulting :)
I believe that religion is nothing more than a mass wordwide brainwashing, and for every religious person to believe that they have a personal relationship with an invisible being (whose existance is unproveable) is crazy.
Imagine someone telling this to a phsyciatrist, without mentioning that they were religious in any way, they would get put in an asylum!
Note: you are gonna hae to use your imagination a little bit because I'm not too good at arguing my point :)
Quote from: Dodger on September 09, 2005, 11:04:02 PM
I believe that religion is nothing more than a mass wordwide brainwashing, and for every religious person to believe that they have a personal relationship with an invisible being (whose existance is unproveable) is crazy.
Not all religious groups believe in a personal spirit force. More than 2/3 of the world believes in a religious faith other than Christianity, Judaism, or Islam, the three main western monotheistic belief systems in which I think this claim is targeted at.
Indeed.
BTW my anti-religious attitude caused me to get a C in my Religious Studies GCSE :P
Quote from: zzboots on September 09, 2005, 10:06:04 PM
As my world history teacher most graciously said,
"It takes as much faith to believe in evolution as it does creationism."
And just so no one makes the foolish post saying, "but there is scientific evidence proving evolution." I must inform you that you are wrong. Evolution is THEORY, and will most likely always remain as such.
Right. I guess we need to teach flat earth in school, because the THEORY of gravity is only a theory. Or maybe we need to go back to the age old idea that illness is caused by evil spirits because Germ THEORY is just that.
Apparently, many people don't understand the difference between the colloquial usage of "theory" and its scientific usage. In the latter case it means a set of commonly accepted facts (supported by evidence, that is) that have been repeatedly tested and that can be used to make predictions about the real world.
I'd say the biggest problem concerning many scientific principles is that a layperson typically either doesn't understand them or has misrepresented notions of what they really state.
Tell me zz, in your own words and notions, how do you define "evolution"?
1 - 0 to kiz
I think it's highly unlikely that evolution will always remain a theory. I bet it will be definitively proven or disproven within our lifetimes. Zz most likely meant to say "Big Bang Theory" or something along those lines. But still, that's a theory with an awful lot of evidence behind it, and who knows what leaps and bounds we'll make in the technology that allows us to collect such data, in the next few decades. I think that phrase of your history teacher's merely suffered from a problem of semantics.
It takes as much faith to believe there is no "God" or "Spiritual Life Force" as it does to believe in any established religion. I think that's what was meant; correct me if I'm wrong. Anyway, this is one hundred percent true. However, many people mistakenly think that science is inherently opposed to religion. The very basis of science is to make no assumptions, except that what we are able to observe and demonstrate is true. So, in the end, science (not scientology) may prove that Jesus was behind it all, or it may not - but nothing is certain. If you think otherwise... well it's your faith, you may do what you wish with it.
That's what I think of Jesus, thank you and goodnight.
Blitzjoker...
Secondly you must have attended 1 day of church to come here and bitch about things that I clearly understood when I used to participate in service.....as a young child.I am forced to go to church every week. But my family is Polish, so I have to go to a Polish church, and I don't speak a word of Polish. So I don't learn anything. But I am forced to study Religion at school because it is a Catholic school.
Take into note the time difference here.... And also the bible is made of many from many different people, hence the different chapters. So there is no single "Mr. Retard". So the authors followed Jesus around all his life and wrote about him. I certainly wouldn't be able to keep up. How did the Bible get published anyway? None of that stuff existed back then.
Again note the time difference, in those times people with different ideas were killed or excommunicated for having different ideas. If I recall correctly, the Bible says Jesus taught his own sermons and went around preaching his word. I don't think this was fully accepted by the government so they crucified him. So Jesus got crucified for doing what he did all his life, and people just noticed? And wasn't Jesus loved a few days before execution, and suddenly everybody hated him? Bible need logic.
Now for your contradiction. At the end of your post you claim "the Bible is bullshit", implying it's not true, but then here you use an event told in the Bible(the resurrection) to justify Jesus not being what the Bible says?Fair enough I suppose :-\ But so many people believe the Bible is true, I might as well accept it as being true even though I don't believe it.
Lastly noone said you have to be a Christian or believe in anything they say, so why are you going off on misinformed rants? Oh and by the way, I currently do not practice any religion, but you don't here me saying everyone who does believe in those ideas have their heads full of bullshit. I made this post to show you how much of a bigot you come off as. My school/family say I have to believe in Christianity. And aren't I entitled to my own opinion. I may have been too offensive, and I apologise, but I should be able to express my views on this subject.
Onto zz...
The purpose of this passage is to show that Jesus has power over nature and trust in God is all you need.You're saying you can do anything with just the trust in God? Ha.
This was Jesus' first miracle at Cana. He was at a wedding, the wedding ran out of wine. His mother Mary asked Him to do something. Jesus said his time had not begun, but he followed his mother's request and changed jugs of water into wine.What is the purpose of that passage? It's not like we can all perform magic tricks to help others.
The key concept to understand is that humans have free will. We have the capability to do good and evil, and God gives us the freedom to choose so. But Christians believe that believing in God and repenting for your sins will result in the forgiveness of sins and everlasting life. Jesus ended sin's rain over the world, no longer would humans perish but be granted new life.Now this is the part of religion that confuses me. Everlasting life? Does that mean if we repent and forgive, humans will live forever? Humans still perish, they don't come back to life like Jesus did. Where is this "new life" they are granted?
Please respect the religious beliefs of other people. I am going to assume you are not a theologian. So how can you make a claim that says 1.1 billion people in the world are wrong? All religious groups need to respect the beliefs of others and be more open to dialogue between the groups.I am also making a claim that the majority of the other 5 billion people in the world are right.
Kiz:
Quote from: Kiz on September 10, 2005, 07:13:52 AM
Right. I guess we need to teach flat earth in school, because the THEORY of gravity is only a theory. Or maybe we need to go back to the age old idea that illness is caused by evil spirits because Germ THEORY is just that.
Apparently, many people don't understand the difference between the colloquial usage of "theory" and its scientific usage. In the latter case it means a set of commonly accepted facts (supported by evidence, that is) that have been repeatedly tested and that can be used to make predictions about the real world.
I'd say the biggest problem concerning many scientific principles is that a layperson typically either doesn't understand them or has misrepresented notions of what they really state.
Tell me zz, in your own words and notions, how do you define "evolution"?
Theory should never be accepted as fact. Do you think the scientists of the old age just said the earth was flat because they liked the ring of it? They said the earth was flat because they had "scientific evidence" they believed was the truth, they believed the earth was suspended as a floating disk in the heavens. First think of the scientific capability back then, then consider this. A person back then may have taken a piece of bread and an orange and poured dirt over both, which one will the dirt stay on? If none of the dirt will stay on the round orange how can anything stay on the Earth? Theories such as gravity did not exist back then, so this is the best they could do.
But I guess if you lived back then you would say it was flat to, because thats was a widely accepted theory at the time. I'm sure these people think they have theories, maybe you should join in http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forums/index.php.
So whats my point? People should never believe theory as fact, because for all you know there can be a theory in the future that will clearly disprove the theory of evolution.
A theory is used to explain the unknown, so yes you can say that there were theories to explain the unknown such as illness being evil spirits and the earth being flat as described above. These theories have been disproved by new technology and more clearly logical theories. So unless you can prove to me how the theory of evolution clearly disproves the theory of religion please shush, Kiz.
Bakster:
Quote from: Bakster on September 10, 2005, 02:59:59 PM
I am forced to go to church every week. But my family is Polish, so I have to go to a Polish church, and I don't speak a word of Polish. So I don't learn anything. But I am forced to study Religion at school because it is a Catholic school.
Do not criticize that which you do not understand.
QuoteSo the authors followed Jesus around all his life and wrote about him. I certainly wouldn't be able to keep up. How did the Bible get published anyway? None of that stuff existed back then.
It was handwritten.....
QuoteSo Jesus got crucified for doing what he did all his life, and people just noticed? And wasn't Jesus loved a few days before execution, and suddenly everybody hated him? Bible need logic.
I doubt the Bible says he was preaching his entire life....I believe the Bible says Jesus was loved by his followers, but not by the government. And who do you think had the power back then?
QuoteMy school/family say I have to believe in Christianity. And aren't I entitled to my own opinion. I may have been too offensive, and I apologise, but I should be able to express my views on this subject.
You are your own person, and your thoughts should reflect what you believe. If you family says you must believe, you do not have to? You may be forced to go to church, so do what you must until you are old enough that you can't be forced to. If your family is mad that you do not wish to be a Christian at that time, then it's their loss because they will be putting more stress on their bodies(by being angry).
You are entitled to your opinion, just make sure your facts are straight and you express your opinion in a polite manor.
Nice points being suggested and discussed here. Bakster your first post was just immature and offensive, but apart from that, this is an interesting topic.
But, kiz suggested that 'evolution' is 100% proven. In fact, it still has many flaws and missing pieces. Even Darwin believed in GOD and had his doubts about the theory. It is taught as fact because scientists consider it the only logical explanation.
Everyone is searching for spirituality no matter how much you deny it. Its in our soul.
LOVE peace SOUL ;)
"Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind." (Albert Einstein)
"You're saying you can do anything with just the trust in God? Ha."
No we are called to be responsible for our own actions. But God can give us guidance and support. There's a story, I'll paraphrase, about a man in an area that was about to be flooded. The weather forcaster warned everyone to evacuate their homes. The man thought, "God will save me". A policeman came to the man's house and told him to leave but he refused, thinking "God will save me". When the water was about waste deep, a boat came by and asked the man to get in, but the man said "No thanks, God will save me". Finally the man was forced to retreat to his roof and a helicopter came flying by. The man refused to be rescued, thinking "God will save me". The man drowns and goes to Heaven. When he sees God, he asked Him, "God, why didn't you save me?" God replies, "What do you mean? I sent you the warning on TV and by policeman. Then I sent the boat and helicopter to rescue you. What more could I do?" The moral of the story is that we find God's presence through the actions of the other people. Take the Simpson's episode, Homer the Heretic, when he is saved by people of various religions, same principle of God working through people here on earth.
"What is the purpose of that passage? It's not like we can all perform magic tricks to help others."
To show how Jesus began his ministry. We all got to start somewhere, the same thing is true about Jesus.
"Now this is the part of religion that confuses me. Everlasting life? Does that mean if we repent and forgive, humans will live forever? Humans still perish, they don't come back to life like Jesus did. Where is this "new life" they are granted?"
The Christian belief is that the soul will live on in the Kingdom of Heaven though some people believe their body will be returned to the soul at the end time. Again it's all speculation about the least understood part of life, death. No one knows what happens once he or she dies, until they do die.
"I am also making a claim that the majority of the other 5 billion people in the world are right"
Though they have hundreds of separate belief systems and ideas about the Other. You can't justify Christianity being wrong, but every other single religion as right. The fact is every person should have the option to make his or her own decision on faith.
Kiz, your examples of incorrect theories help justify my point. It is possible that the THEORY of Evolution may turn out to be correct. And Kiz, I see a great deal of potential correctness in Evolution, so I am not just posting against it based upon a belief in creationism. I look at the bible in a contextual way. The creation story is more of a representation of God's presence in the formation of the world rather then an exact guideline.
"I think it's highly unlikely that evolution will always remain a theory. I bet it will be definitively proven or disproven within our lifetimes."
Are you going to build a time machine and travel back millions of years? ??? You cannot prove evolution based on a few bones and educated guesses. The slow process of evolution would mean that we would have to record and document thousands of years of change for species still evolving today, but that still wouldn't account for the events of the past.
wow... these posts are so long. No way in hell im reading these.
Quote from: BlitzJoker on September 10, 2005, 06:55:22 PM
Kiz:
Theory should never be accepted as fact. Do you think the scientists of the old age just said the earth was flat because they liked the ring of it? They said the earth was flat because they had "scientific evidence" they believed was the truth
Which was?
QuoteSo whats my point? People should never believe theory as fact, because for all you know there can be a theory in the future that will clearly disprove the theory of evolution.
I guess I should stop you right here. This is what I mean when I say that you conflate the colloquial understanding of the term "theory" and it's usage in science.
In science, "theory" does not mean "hunch" or "hypothesis", it genuinely means a set of principals that have been supported by empirical evidence and have explanatory and predictive power.
QuoteSo unless you can prove to me how the theory of evolution clearly disproves the theory of religion please shush, Kiz.
Huh? What are you going on about?
It's funny how you think that just because I'm espousing evolution I am somehow trying to denounce religion.
/edit It's also interesting to note that many people share this insight.
Quote from: zzboots on September 10, 2005, 08:07:05 PM
Kiz, your examples of incorrect theories help justify my point. It is possible that the THEORY of Evolution may turn out to be correct. And Kiz, I see a great deal of potential correctness in Evolution, so I am not just posting against it based upon a belief in creationism. I look at the bible in a contextual way. The creation story is more of a representation of God's presence in the formation of the world rather then an exact guideline.
How does it help justify your point? I guess you forgot to explain that part.
/edit
Btw, zz, I asked you earlier if you could give share with me your understanding what evolutionary theory states. Just as a reminder.
Quote from: Kiz on September 10, 2005, 10:21:47 PM
How does it help justify your point? I guess you forgot to explain that part.
/edit
Btw, zz, I asked you earlier if you could give share with me your understanding what evolutionary theory states. Just as a reminder.
You brought up theories that were later proven to be untrue. So it is possible that that evolution may one day be discredited despite so much current backing.
Evolution is the transformation, be it gradual or radical, of one species into another. The evolutionary theory is that life developed from one common ancestor then branched out into new groups of species over the course of millions of years.
Quote from: zzboots on September 10, 2005, 10:38:53 PM
You brought up theories that were later proven to be untrue. So it is possible that that evolution may one day be discredited despite so much current backing.
This is fallacious reasoning. Just because something might be proven false doesn't mean that it is false.
"We shouldn't trust in Germ Theory, because [insert arbitrary theory here] has been proven false, therefore it too will be proven false."
Do you see how this is bad reasoning?
QuoteEvolution is the transformation, be it gradual or radical, of one species into another. The evolutionary theory is that life developed from one common ancestor then branched out into new groups of species over the course of millions of years.
Pretty much (more accuarately, though, it is the change of a genepool of a population over time). Now, why is it that you claim that there is no evidence for evolution despite the plethora of instances in the fossil record of gradual changes of skeletal structure over time and the cases of observed speciation today?a
Quote from: Kiz on September 10, 2005, 10:18:56 PM
Which was?
Well I already gave one example, but maybe you mind missed that one.......it was the observation of things not staying on a round surface. They thought, how could anything stay on something round without simply falling off. For further answers the that question you can go wiki "flat earth".
Quote from: Kiz on September 10, 2005, 10:18:56 PM
guess I should stop you right here. This is what I mean when I say that you conflate the colloquial understanding of the term "theory" and it's usage in science.
In science, "theory" does not mean "hunch" or "hypothesis", it genuinely means a set of principals that have been supported by empirical evidence and have explanatory and predictive power.
Ok please read my posts before you make an idiot of yourself. I never said it was a hunch, or a hypothesis, nor did I imply it. Ok now this may cause you to use some, not all, but some(well maybe all for you) of your brain......you could term it critical thinking if you want.
Now throughout the past theories have been made, and they have had scientific backing sufficient for the time they were made in. When the idea of the flat earth came up in the past, they couldn't just jump in a rocket and fly to space to see what shape the Earth was. They used what they could given their point of development to test a hypothesis, and if their evidence was sufficient it would be accepted as a theory. This goes for any theory so don't bother asking me for examples.....its quite obvious that this has happened.
So to try and show you how this relates: Currently you and others feel there is sufficient evidence to make evolution a theory, and there is. But again, that does NOT make it fact. In the future there can be new technology, new findings not currently available or even imagined in our heads, to completely disprove the theory of evolution(which is the same thing that has happened through the past).
Quote from: Kiz on September 10, 2005, 10:18:56 PM
Huh? What are you going on about?
It's funny how you think that just because I'm espousing evolution I am somehow trying to denounce religion.
I don't really see anything comical about that? You are implying that because the theory of evolution has some experiments that have supported it(same with every other theory, thats how it becomes a "theory") that it is true. So explain to me how evolution can be true and the theory that god created man and the world is also true?
Quote from: Kiz on September 10, 2005, 10:18:56 PM
/edit It's also interesting to note that many people share this insight.
Ok now just so you won't find something comical again I'll say this first. Here I am guessing that by putting this in here because it someway supports your point. Just because something is widely accepted doesn't mean anything. Everyone used to think the universe was Earth centered, need I say more?
Finally I hope you go on to rant about me not understanding theory because you understand it better than anyone. Well come to think of it, maybe you are the one who doesn't understand.
Here is a quote from wiki
"In science, a theory is never considered fact or infallible, because we can never assume we know all there is to know. Instead, theories remain standing until they are disproven, at which point they are thrown out altogether or modified to fit the additional data."That basically summarizes what I have been trying to get through your think head using examples from the past.
Quote from: BlitzJoker on September 10, 2005, 11:58:14 PM
Well I already gave one example, but maybe you mind missed that one.......it was the observation of things not staying on a round surface. They thought, how could anything stay on something round without simply falling off. For further answers the that question you can go wiki "flat earth".
It is very weak to say that liquid falling off of an orange is evidence that the earth is round, because you are making the assumption that gravity originates from below the globe. One has to support this assumption otherwise it is a fallacy of equivocation.
QuoteOk please read my posts before you make an idiot of yourself. I never said it was a hunch, or a hypothesis, nor did I imply it. Ok now this may cause you to use some, not all, but some(well maybe all for you) of your brain......you could term it critical thinking if you want.
Saying it is "just" a theory certainly implies it. Theories are what carry weight, since they are principles supported by evidence. Gravity is "just" a theory too, maybe we should disregard that as well?
QuoteSo to try and show you how this relates: Currently you and others feel there is sufficient evidence to make evolution a theory, and there is. But again, that does NOT make it fact. In the future there can be new technology, new findings not currently available or even imagined in our heads, to completely disprove the theory of evolution(which is the same thing that has happened through the past).
Argument to the future. Just because it may be disproven in the future doesn't mean it's false, this is the same mistake zz made in his last post
QuoteI don't really see anything comical about that? You are implying that because the theory of evolution has some experiments that have supported it(same with every other theory, thats how it becomes a "theory") that it is true. So explain to me how evolution can be true and the theory that god created man and the world is also true?
I never said that god creating man and the world is true or false. You're just trying to interject that point.
QuoteOk now just so you won't find something comical again I'll say this first. Here I am guessing that by putting this in here because it someway supports your point. Just because something is widely accepted doesn't mean anything. Everyone used to think the universe was Earth centered, need I say more?
I agree with you here. General acceptance doesn't confirm an idea. But that's not what my point here is, it is that evolution IS supported by evidence and saying that you will not believe in it because it may be disproven sometime in the future is silly.
Also, about my explanation of theory, I agree I've misdefined it by including the word "fact". It happens.
QuoteIt is very weak to say that liquid falling off of an orange is evidence that the earth is round, because you are making the assumption that gravity originates from below the globe. One has to support this assumption otherwise it is a fallacy of equivocation.
This was an example from the past, they didn't know what gravity was.............
QuoteSaying it is "just" a theory certainly implies it. Theories are what carry weight, since they are principles supported by evidence. Gravity is "just" a theory too, maybe we should disregard that as well?
I never said we should disregard something because it's a theory, I am saying we should not accept it as fact.
QuoteArgument to the future. Just because it may be disproven in the future doesn't mean it's false, this is the same mistake zz made in his last post
And just because it's proven now doesn't mean it's true.
QuoteI never said that god creating man and the world is true or false. You're just trying to interject that point.
The theory of evolution and god creating the world are conflicting, and since you are supporting the former, thats where I incorporated that from. But whatever.
QuoteI agree with you here. General acceptance doesn't confirm an idea. But that's not what my point here is, it is that evolution IS supported by evidence and saying that you will not believe in it because it may be disproven sometime in the future is silly.
I never said I didn't believe in evolution, because I actually do firmly believe in it. I was just saying that you comming on here to criticise zz for saying that evolution is as much as a theory as the religious explanation is simply wrong.
QuoteAlso, about my explanation of theory, I agree I've misdefined it by including the word "fact". It happens.
pwned.
I'm done.
Quote from: BlitzJoker on September 11, 2005, 07:04:53 AM
This was an example from the past, they didn't know what gravity was.............
It wasn't a scientific theory, that's the point.
QuoteI never said we should disregard something because it's a theory, I am saying we should not accept it as fact.
Excuse me, but wasn't it zz who said that evolution is only a "theory" therefore we should give it as much credence as any other (scientific or not)?
QuoteAnd just because it's proven now doesn't mean it's true.
It's a little pointless to say that because we assume that it is true because it is useful. For example, Newton's laws of motion turned out to be incomplete, but they were and still are useful for describing more common mechanics.
In fact, since evolution is supported by a torrent of evidence it would be surprising if any theory that were to replace it (if that were to happen) would be substantially different.
QuoteThe theory of evolution and god creating the world are conflicting, and since you are supporting the former, thats where I incorporated that from. But whatever.
No, they're only conflicting if you believe in the literal interpretation of Genesis. One view is that God has guided the evolution process along, no?
QuoteI never said I didn't believe in evolution, because I actually do firmly believe in it. I was just saying that you comming on here to criticise zz for saying that evolution is as much as a theory as the religious explanation is simply wrong.
Ummm, sorry to burst your bubble, but creationism is not a scientific theory.
Quote
pwned
Careful, your ego's sticking out :P
Now I could have a reply to all but probably one of those.
So i figured I would choose the most important.
QuoteCareful, your ego's sticking out :P
Heh ;)
Like I said I'm done...
Quote from: BlitzJoker on September 11, 2005, 07:36:17 AM
Now I could have a reply to all but probably one of those.
Why not do so, then?
Quote from: Kiz on September 10, 2005, 11:25:53 PM
This is fallacious reasoning. Just because something might be proven false doesn't mean that it is false.
"We shouldn't trust in Germ Theory, because [insert arbitrary theory here] has been proven false, therefore it too will be proven false."
Do you see how this is bad reasoning?
I never said one should treat a theory as false. I said theories have the potential to be false. So you have to be open to other potential ideas. Theories are wonderful tools. Take caution and make sure you don't call a theory fact.
Quote
Pretty much (more accuarately, though, it is the change of a genepool of a population over time). Now, why is it that you claim that there is no evidence for evolution despite the plethora of instances in the fossil record of gradual changes of skeletal structure over time and the cases of observed speciation today?a
I didn't "claim there is no evidence for evolution". But fossil records are incomplete. You can't trace back exact lineages of fossils from parent to child proving that evolution occurred.
:-\ if I must.................................
QuoteIt wasn't a scientific theory, that's the point.
In their days it was, they couldn't exactly fly out to space, take a picture, and wire it back to earth now could they? See you can't hold the evidence needed to prove a theory back then to the same standards as today. They were not nearly as advanced.
QuoteExcuse me, but wasn't it zz who said that evolution is only a "theory" therefore we should give it as much credence as any other (scientific or not)?
Maybe you took it as he did, or maybe he really did? But I am not zz now am I?
I said it should not be given more credit.
QuoteIt's a little pointless to say that because we assume that it is true because it is useful. For example, Newton's laws of motion turned out to be incomplete, but they were and still are useful for describing more common mechanics.
In fact, since evolution is supported by a torrent of evidence it would be surprising if any theory that were to replace it (if that were to happen) would be substantially different.
How is this even relevant, I said that we should not accept it as fact and know that the possibility of there being other theories that may prove to be more factual. I said nothing of discrediting it or not making use of the information we have discovered.
QuoteNo, they're only conflicting if you believe in the literal interpretation of Genesis. One view is that God has guided the evolution process along, no?
The Bible doesn't say god guided the evolution process, these posts being based on the "literal interpretation", because it is what has been taught in the churches I have visited.
QuoteUmmm, sorry to burst your bubble, but creationism is not a scientific theory.
This is the one I said I might not be able to respond to, for I have limited knowledge of the origins of creationism and do not have enough to prove anything. So I can not argue this point.
Quote from: zzboots on September 11, 2005, 08:06:43 AM
I never said one should treat a theory as false. I said theories have the potential to be false. So you have to be open to other potential ideas. Theories are wonderful tools. Take caution and make sure you don't call a theory fact.
Jeez, I've said "fact" once and now you're assaulting me with it. I guess I deserve it :P.
So, yes, we have to be open to other potential ideas. I was just responding to your previous point that evolution is no better than any other theory. Hey, if you have a better theory that has more explanatory power than evolution and that is supported by evidence why not write a paper?
QuoteI didn't "claim there is no evidence for evolution".
Yes, you did:
Quote
And just so no one makes the foolish post saying, "but there is scientific evidence proving evolution." I must inform you that you are wrong. Evolution is THEORY, and will most likely always remain as such.
QuoteBut fossil records are incomplete. You can't trace back exact lineages of fossils from parent to child proving that evolution occurred.
That is true. But you must agree that it would be some sort of giant coincidence if the many perserved fossils just HAPPENED to have a linear gradation over the course of millions of years.
Plus, we can observe speciation today so it is not so farfetched that there really was a gradual shift in genetic makeup.
Quote from: BlitzJoker on September 11, 2005, 08:09:44 AM
:-\ if I must.................................
In their days it was, they couldn't exactly fly out to space, take a picture, and wire it back to earth now could they? See you can't hold the evidence needed to prove a theory back then to the same standards as today. They were not nearly as advanced.
The reason it was not a scientific theory is because they had no evidence for it. And liquid falling of an orange is not equivalent to scientific evidence.
Sure, this was their sort of reasoning at the time, but is it a scientific theory? No.
QuoteMaybe you took it as he did, or maybe he really did? But I am not zz now am I?
I said it should not be given more credit.
I think I see where the confusion lies. I originally responded to zz's posts and then you responded to those. So any point I'm making is in response to zz's original assertions, not to what you may or may not believe.
And, it shouldn't receive more credit? Why do you say so? You have a better theory with corresponding evidence?
QuoteHow is this even relevant, I said that we should not accept it as fact and know that the possibility of there being other theories that may prove to be more factual. I said nothing of discrediting it or not making use of the information we have discovered.
You said we shouldn't say it is true, but the point I was making is that we do assume it is true because it has an inherent usefulness as any good scientific theory does.
QuoteThe Bible doesn't say god guided the evolution process, these posts being based on the "literal interpretation", because it is what has been taught in the churches I have visited.
I see. Anyway, I didn't mean for our discussion to tread on any theological implications.
Blitzjoker:
Do not criticize that which you do not understand.I forgot to mention I studied Religion since my very first day of school which is about 12 years. But I was probably asleep for half of those lessons ;)
It was handwritten.....It's pretty hard watching a person every second of every day whilst writing down what he is doing. That doesnt explain how it was published, or how it was preserved for some 2000 years.
"What is the purpose of that passage? It's not like we can all perform magic tricks to help others."
To show how Jesus began his ministry. We all got to start somewhere, the same thing is true about Jesus.
He continued to perform miracles in his later life: Feeding of the 5000, Walking on water etc. It's not like we can all perform magic tricks to help others.
"I am also making a claim that the majority of the other 5 billion people in the world are right"
Though they have hundreds of separate belief systems and ideas about the Other. You can't justify Christianity being wrong, but every other single religion as right. The fact is every person should have the option to make his or her own decision on faith.
I never said every other religion apart from Christianity was right. I don't know jack shit about other religions. Fine, people can believe what they want, I wasn't trying to "convert" anyone. I was just saying what I think of Christian beliefs.
Quote from: Bakster on September 11, 2005, 04:01:43 PM
It's pretty hard watching a person every second of every day whilst writing down what he is doing. That doesnt explain how it was published, or how it was preserved for some 2000 years.
Other works such as the Iliad and the Odyssey have been preserved for thousands of years. Hieroglyphics and other ancient writings have been preserved longer. Cave paintings even longer. It's not some far fetched idea that a piece of writing survived over an extended period of time.
Quote
"I am also making a claim that the majority of the other 5 billion people in the world are right"
I never said every other religion apart from Christianity was right.
Am I missing something? ???
Quote
He continued to perform miracles in his later life: Feeding of the 5000, Walking on water etc. It's not like we can all perform magic tricks to help others.
You are missing the point of the bible. And please stop using the phrase magic tricks. The point is to demonstrate Jesus' actions in helping other people. The means by which he did it are irrelevant. It is supposed to inspire people to help those around the, with whatever means are able to do so. I.E. Feeding the five thousand >> Go work at a soup kitchen feeding the poor.
I am not very good at this whole arguing thing. Practice makes perfect :P
Jesus is real!!!! all you non-believers should watch the exorcism of emily rose and then ask yourself if there is even a remote chance that he does indeed exist. Not trying to say everyone should believe in God but, dont knock my religion and i wont knock your theories or beliefs!
Jesus doesn't exist, but I wish I didn't know that. Life would be so much easier if I could blame everything on a supreme being, rather than having to take responsibility for my own actions. :-\
Duelboard gets deeper everyday.
Quote from: Parsley on October 28, 2005, 09:52:47 AM
Jesus doesn't exist
What do you mean by Jesus doesn't exist? Roman historical records speak of his existance as a person here on earth. Or are you trying to say something like he is not devine. Please explain yourself?
Well, there could be lots of people called Jesus back then ;D
It might have been a popular name.
Anyway, even if Jesus did exist, he might not have been godly or whatever, it might just be an over the top story put in the bible to "confirm" people's belief of god.
If Jesus is so great, why doesn't he come down to Earth now and tell everyone not to sin. As far as I'm concerned, 2005 AD needs Jesus more than they did back then.
Quote from: Bakster on October 31, 2005, 11:55:39 PM
Well, there could be lots of people called Jesus back then ;D
It might have been a popular name.
Again logical issues... Are you trying to argue since more than one person might have been named Jesus, then this disproves his existence? ??? The references say something along the lines of mentioning Christians who followed Jesus the Christ. Could they make it any more specific? I actually have a book where this is mentioned but it's upstairs and I am downstairs.
Quote from: Bakster on October 31, 2005, 11:55:39 PM
Anyway, even if Jesus did exist, he might not have been godly or whatever, it might just be an over the top story put in the bible to "confirm" people's belief of god.
Islam believes that St. Paul is the one who fabricated the story about Jesus' divinity. I do not believe that you are a Muslim so I am forced to assume you simply do not believe in Jesus based on some unannounced reason. Bible is not the right word you want to use. The scripture of the Jewish people had been set for about 400 years. The books and letters that would become the new testament were written in response to Jesus' life. So the written story developed out of response to a man, not the other way around.
Putting confirm in quotations is very offensive and is a personal attack against anyone who holds any faith beliefs for any religion (including atheism).
Quote from: Bakster on October 31, 2005, 11:55:39 PM
If Jesus is so great, why doesn't he come down to Earth now and tell everyone not to sin. As far as I'm concerned, 2005 AD needs Jesus more than they did back then.
Do you really want Jesus to come back now? The second coming of Jesus is said to be the end of the world, Judgement Day. You do not understand the culture that Jesus was living in 2000 years ago. People had a "tooth for a tooth, an eye for an eye" system of justice, women were basically treated as possessions, the homeless and downtrodden were ignored, polytheism and sin were everywhere. There weren't any freedoms for the poor and no hope either. Jesus came and provided a helping hand to everyone he came in contact with. But Jesus' presence can still be felt today, in the actions of volunteers, the merciful, peacemakers, those people around us doing good.
If you want to have a serious discussion about religion thats fine. But once again I have to ask you to show reverence towards all religious ideas.
I think Jesus was cool. But most (not all, but most) of his followers are not cool. I will admit there are some really hot Christian girls though. Going to church can be a great way to meet chicks.
I hate religion. But I still believe that God exists ;D
(That's not to say I believe God came down from heaven as Jesus blah blah blah)
i have a question 4 u guys
if we are all gods children, whats so special about jesus?
Quote from: TheMcCool on November 02, 2005, 06:45:22 AM
I think Jesus was cool. But most (not all, but most) of his followers are not cool. I will admit there are some really hot Christian girls though. Going to church can be a great way to meet chicks.
This is the pointless, disrespectful crap that is not needed.
Quote from: haferhole1 on November 02, 2005, 06:48:15 PM
i have a question 4 u guys
if we are all gods children, whats so special about jesus?
Christian belief is that Jesus is divine.
i know, i just thought it was funny. i got it from jimmy carr's stand up
I didn't disrespect Christianity, I just stated what I thought of Jesus. It's on topic. Rather than add to a discussion on the factuality of the portrayal of Jesus, the content of which we've all read about hundreds of times (to me that's pointless crap unless you have something new to bring to the table - which no one here did,) I gave my admittedly light-hearted opinion on Jesus as a person. But I should have expected a reaction like that from zz. To elaborate - I respect what Jesus did and what he stood for, back in his time. I dislike what christianity has become, and some of its effects on modern society. It is a big part of western culture, and was a driving force in bringing about humanitarian rights as a norm. But who's to say that wouldn't have happened anyway, or wasn't happening already?
What don't I like about Christianity? I wish I kept lists of these things, but let's start off with something simple. They have a whole rigamarole in the bible of how Jesus and his followers were persecuted, and suffered so much. Now that Christianity is on top in the world (arguably) why are so many of them so intolerant of other religions and ideologies? Yes, not all Christians are intolerant, but it seems like a good majority are. That's why I say I dislike its "effects," and what it has "become" in some very sizeable portions of the world.
Quote from: TheMcCool on November 03, 2005, 10:14:38 PM
I didn't disrespect Christianity, I just stated what I thought of Jesus. It's on topic. Rather than add to a discussion on the factuality of the portrayal of Jesus, the content of which we've all read about hundreds of times (to me that's pointless crap unless you have something new to bring to the table - which no one here did,) I gave my admittedly light-hearted opinion on Jesus as a person. But I should have expected a reaction like that from zz.
You
Know what I was referring to.
Quote from: TheMcCool on November 02, 2005, 06:45:22 AM
I will admit there are some really hot Christian girls though. Going to church can be a great way to meet chicks.
Well I apologize for offending you. It's just weird: you're like the only one on this messageboard who won't take a tongue in cheek comment for what it is, and insist on applying your own hangups to it to put it in an offensive light. Alright zz, continue with your serious discussions... I'll stay out of it, unless someone comes up with something worth discussing.
Okay. Hypothetical question for the Christians amongst us.
God comes down to earth one day and shouts 'I quit!', shuts the doors to heaven, clicks his fingers and de-etherealises into nothingness.
What would you do?
Kill myself.
We wouldn't know if God "quit" as we can't see or hear him. We are clueless to whether he actually did create the world or not for the same reason. If some religious person "felt" this or had a vision, then even the religious people would think he is mentally insane as they would think that God would never leave his creations.
But it wouldn't really matter. What does God do for us anyway...answer our prayers and that's about it.
'hypothetical' means 'make believe' - so 'hypothetically' speaking he manifests himself in a way that we can see and hear (like the Big J himself)
The whole concept of a Christian God is a loving God. His love is infinite so it will not just "dry up one day." God is outside the realm of time so if he has already started, he won't be stopping. ;)
Quote from: TheMcCool on November 03, 2005, 10:14:38 PM
Now that Christianity is on top in the world (arguably) why are so many of them so intolerant of other religions and ideologies? Yes, not all Christians are intolerant, but it seems like a good majority are.
I am honestly tired of people talking about tolerance. Jesus said "I am the way, the truth, and the light. No one comes to the father
except through me." that means that if you believe in the Bible in it's entirety, you also beleive that all other religions do not lead to heaven. So, we sit back and say, "good luck with that! I accept your beleifs even though I know you're going to hell."? No, I think not. This doesn't mean we go out and beat people up, or torture people of other religions for being different. So what is this entire tolerance thing about in the first place?
Quote from: T3h luggage on November 04, 2005, 11:24:47 PM
So what is this entire tolerance thing about in the first place?
Being acceptive in allowing people to practice as they see fit. If you force someone to believe something, then it has lost all value. You can preach your beliefs without being too forceful, and other religious groups are entitled to do as well. Remember also, that Jesus warned people not to judge each other. That is reserved for God. Assuming that someone else will go to hell because of something he or she has done is a dangerous thing.
Also it is important to keep in mind the concept of the invisible church. ;)
Quote from: T3h luggage on November 04, 2005, 11:24:47 PM
I am honestly tired of people talking about tolerance. Jesus said "I am the way, the truth, and the light. No one comes to the father except through me." that means that if you believe in the Bible in it's entirety, you also beleive that all other religions do not lead to heaven. So, we sit back and say, "good luck with that! I accept your beleifs even though I know you're going to hell."? No, I think not. This doesn't mean we go out and beat people up, or torture people of other religions for being different. So what is this entire tolerance thing about in the first place?
Well, notice that I'm not directly talking about Christianity, but the people who practice it. The point is that a large percentage of Christians don't in fact fit with your view of the reasonable and rational Christian. But I realize the same holds true with most people in general. I didn't bring it up as a point of argument, I was just explaining an earlier statement.
Edit: If you really want to know about religious intolerance, look up news articles on the interweb. It does in fact exist as more than a catchphrase for whiners.
if jesus could walk on water, why didnt he just run into the ocean to avoid death