Gunny's Thread on Religion

[JBeukema]

Mr. Loki,

Ill use more political correctness. Are you of the Negroid race my child ?

Relevance?

 

[WhiteLion]

I think that I have been guilty of that. Then I matured (not to say that I am perfect now) and decided that God (assuming that he, she, it, or they exist) will be the ultimate judge. Adolph Hitler might have called himself a Christian for all that I know about his statements. If he said so, then he might have been right or he might have been wrong. I’m in no position to judge. I think that I know the Bible pretty well but I would not presume to know enough to decide who God would allow into heaven (assuming that Biblical instructions on salvation are true). I’ll be civil and just leave it up to God and/or Jesus to decide. I have enough to do to just keep my house in order. Know what I mean?

I think thats probably a good attitude to have. so how many of us truly have our houses in order?

Civility is great but its not enough just to keep ones house in order, even reprobate heathens keep their houses in order,that attitude is ridin the fence, and does nothing for the kingdom of Jesus the Christ. We are to keep busy about the business of Jesus the Christ in everything we do until HE returns. However on the subject of judgement, the bible says judgement starts at the house of GOD? huh whatcha means there Whitelion? lol what i mean is, there are numerous scriptures that place judgement at the feet of Christians again we must judge ourselves first(Matthew 7:5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.). Also GODS WORD says the saints will judge the angels in that great and terrible day.

 

[BrokenAngel]

The Christians that teach people go to heaven when they die are not teaching biblical information,

Nor the ones who say god loves 'all his children' or who present the biblical god as one of peace and love and mercy

"God" the Creator. What does "God" actually have to be? A life form beyond the intellectual capability of Man, who is able to create life in its own image. Man himself is capable of recreating life through cloning. Don't think because there is some ban on human cloning that some eggheads aren't already hard at it.

So let's apply some logic here. Life, and consequently Man was created by happenstance. Just teh exact mixture of air, water and minerals came together at exactly the perfect time to create life on Earth; which , just happens to be a planet perfectly situated in the galaxy to support life as we know it.

That is neither logical, nor is it mathematically even close to likely.

Where science attempts to encroach on religion, it fails miserably.

The best way I have ever heard this point made was: You can take every piece to a VCR and place it in a dryer. No matter how many times you turn on the cycle, no matter how long you let the cycle run, you will never end a cycle with a fully built VCR.

It just seems to logically take a helping hand of some kind to put those complicated pieces in place.

 

[JBeukema]

The old 'IC' argument?

I can't keep track of how many times that bullshit's been refuted; it's utter fallaciousness and dishonesty

 

[JBeukema]

First, I'll let Don respond to an earlier comment...

[youtube]Izl5BB2AkZE[/youtube]

 

[mattskramer]

The best way I have ever heard this point made was: You can take every piece to a VCR and place it in a dryer. No matter how many times you turn on the cycle, no matter how long you let the cycle run, you will never end a cycle with a fully built VCR.

It just seems to logically take a helping hand of some kind to put those complicated pieces in place.

Yes. Yet, if you had 10 to the power of 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 to the power of 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 dryers it increases the chances that one of those would assemble a VCR.

 

[JBeukema]

[youtube]mcAq9bmCeR0[/youtube]

 

[mattskramer]

[youtube]mcAq9bmCeR0[/youtube]

Wow!!! Thanks for the insightful and sound criticism of the smashed clock argument. I loved it.

 

[Political Junky]

I'm reposting this from the "logical, rational, and reasonable debate" thread:

I think this might be a good place to pose a few questions to the religious people who are participating in this discussion.

So, for Christians, it's a given that those who do not believe that Jesus Christ was the messiah and died for their sins (meaning: all those who are not Christian, even Jews and Muslims who believe in the same god) are going to hell, which is a place where they will be separated from God and be tortured with fire and brimstone for all of eternity (although there are some Biblical scholars who believe that the Bible actually teaches that nonbelievers will be completely destroyed, but that's a whole other discussion). Please correct me if any of that is wrong.

It is also a given that God created man in his own image, and loves and takes a special interest in each and every one of the people he created. God's love for man is emphasized throughout Christianity.

Now, the word of God is revealed to us through the Bible. As God no longer makes his presence known the way he did in Biblical days, the Bible is the only direct communication we have from God. It is his word, written by him through man, and contains all the information we need in order to know what it takes to be saved. (Again, please correct me if any of this is wrong)

Here are some facts about the Bible and about the world today, from my understanding: the Bible was written (in installments) about two millenia ago, in a particular language (Hebrew) to a particular group of people. There is a story in the Bible about the Tower of Babel, in which God punishes mankind for trying to build a tower tall enough to reach Heaven by scattering them across the earth and splitting their languages. So, according to the Bible, the reason that we have about 7,000 different languages spoken on the planet today is because God made it so as a punishment. Because the Bible must be translated into so many different languages from its original Hebrew, and since the Hebrew language has changed and evolved so much in the last two thousand years, as all languages do, many things in the Bible are lost, confused, or the meaning changed in translation.

So, these are the questions I have for you:

God created us all and loves us all immensely. Any of us who do not believe in him will be doomed to suffer for all of eternity. Is there a way to reconcile those two ideas? Is eternal horrendous suffering a punishment that is fitting of the crime of not believing in the existence of God? Why would a loving God base the salvation of his creations on their belief in him, rather than their character or morality or some other criteria?

Also: is it fair that since the punishment for nonbelief is eternal torment, God made it so difficult to come to believe in him? Would he not be morally obligated to make his existence painfully obvious to each and every one of us, if the consequences for not believing in him are so severe?

I am not asking these questions as some sort of challenge; these are legitimate questions I have about Christianity and they are some of the main reasons why I do not believe. My mind is open to the existence of a higher power...I just don't believe that the higher power in question is the one I desrcribed above. But my mind isn't even completely closed to THAT possibility, since I acknowledge it's possible that there are things I don't fully understand...which is why I'm posing these questions, in hopes that someone can give me a good explanation for the discrepancies I feel I'm seeing here.

And, again, if I am wrong in any of those above assertions, please correct me. If I'm going to believe or disbelieve in something, I want to know the absolute truth about that something first.

“The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion”
*George Washington

 

[mattskramer]

I'm reposting this from the "logical, rational, and reasonable debate" thread:

I think this might be a good place to pose a few questions to the religious people who are participating in this discussion.

So, for Christians, it's a given that those who do not believe that Jesus Christ was the messiah and died for their sins (meaning: all those who are not Christian, even Jews and Muslims who believe in the same god) are going to hell, which is a place where they will be separated from God and be tortured with fire and brimstone for all of eternity (although there are some Biblical scholars who believe that the Bible actually teaches that nonbelievers will be completely destroyed, but that's a whole other discussion). Please correct me if any of that is wrong.

It is also a given that God created man in his own image, and loves and takes a special interest in each and every one of the people he created. God's love for man is emphasized throughout Christianity.

Now, the word of God is revealed to us through the Bible. As God no longer makes his presence known the way he did in Biblical days, the Bible is the only direct communication we have from God. It is his word, written by him through man, and contains all the information we need in order to know what it takes to be saved. (Again, please correct me if any of this is wrong)

Here are some facts about the Bible and about the world today, from my understanding: the Bible was written (in installments) about two millenia ago, in a particular language (Hebrew) to a particular group of people. There is a story in the Bible about the Tower of Babel, in which God punishes mankind for trying to build a tower tall enough to reach Heaven by scattering them across the earth and splitting their languages. So, according to the Bible, the reason that we have about 7,000 different languages spoken on the planet today is because God made it so as a punishment. Because the Bible must be translated into so many different languages from its original Hebrew, and since the Hebrew language has changed and evolved so much in the last two thousand years, as all languages do, many things in the Bible are lost, confused, or the meaning changed in translation.

So, these are the questions I have for you:

God created us all and loves us all immensely. Any of us who do not believe in him will be doomed to suffer for all of eternity. Is there a way to reconcile those two ideas? Is eternal horrendous suffering a punishment that is fitting of the crime of not believing in the existence of God? Why would a loving God base the salvation of his creations on their belief in him, rather than their character or morality or some other criteria?

Also: is it fair that since the punishment for nonbelief is eternal torment, God made it so difficult to come to believe in him? Would he not be morally obligated to make his existence painfully obvious to each and every one of us, if the consequences for not believing in him are so severe?

I am not asking these questions as some sort of challenge; these are legitimate questions I have about Christianity and they are some of the main reasons why I do not believe. My mind is open to the existence of a higher power...I just don't believe that the higher power in question is the one I desrcribed above. But my mind isn't even completely closed to THAT possibility, since I acknowledge it's possible that there are things I don't fully understand...which is why I'm posing these questions, in hopes that someone can give me a good explanation for the discrepancies I feel I'm seeing here.

And, again, if I am wrong in any of those above assertions, please correct me. If I'm going to believe or disbelieve in something, I want to know the absolute truth about that something first.

Correct me if I am wrong but it seems to me as if you are struggling with an age old dilemma that goes something like this:

The following four statements can’t logically coexist:
God is all good and just.
God is all knowing.
God is all powerful.
There is injustice in the world.

Let us take the fourth premise as given. I think that it is obvious to almost everyone that good this sometimes happen to bad people and that bad things sometimes happen to innocent people. All that one needs to do is take a good look at this picture to see that.

http://pulitzerphotos.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/10542831_e52cfff4a0.jpg

If God is good and just, then how can he allow such to happen? Did this baby have a choice concerning his condition? God does not know that such is happening, or he knows that it is happening and can do nothing about it, or he does not care.

There are some alleged answers to that quandary. None of them seem to satisfy me.

1.) God is waiting and will serve justice in due time. Perhaps the suffering of the innocent will be rewarded in the afterlife. Perhaps God knows more or has higher reasoning skills than does his creation and that he will set things straight for every human being that ever existed in due time. I would like to know how God would accomplish this.

2.) Similarly, there are those who explain it by asking how we dare question our creator. It would be like an injured animal asking a man why the man is hurting the animal when the man is actually trying to heal the animal. This analogy seems to be lacking something for me. What is the suffering baby to learn by suffering?

3.) Without “bad” we would not have a concept of “good”. First of all, this does not excuse the suffering that innocent people endure. Secondly, the suffering that innocent people endure need not be so harsh in order for us to understand such abstract concepts.

I hope that this helps.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

I just read a great argument for atheism by Salman Rushdie: here is a paraphrased version:

All the true believers of the world have excellent reasons why they don't believe in any God or gods other than their own; all those reasons combined are why I don't believe in any god.

 

[tigerbob]

I just read a great argument for atheism by Salman Rushdie: here is a paraphrased version:

All the true believers of the world have excellent reasons why they don't believe in any God or gods other than their own; all those reasons combined are why I don't believe in any god.

I'm not sure exactly what you've paraphrased, so I don't know whether I'm taking issue with your phraseology or Rushdie's, but the flaw in that argument is in the first 4 words.

"All the true believers...". Who the hell is he (I'll assume it's him, not you) to say what a true believer is, or what they must and must not think? Just because it neatly fits his rationale doesn't make it so.

I view myself as a Christian. I have never tried to disprove the existence of any other Gods. Why? 2 reasons. Firstly I have not studied other religions and wouldn't know what the hell I was talking about. Secondly, trying to disprove a belief is an exercise in futility, stupidity and arrogance, not to mention a total waste of time. Oh, and thirdly what's the bloody point even if it was possible?

Life isn't like the movie 'Dogma', where the Angel of Death shows up, explains to the nun why her beliefs are flawed and convinces her to go out and buy herself a hot dress.

It's not a great argument for atheism. He is an atheist and he's come up with a glib way of post-rationalizing it. If religious scholars are the only people he talks to about this then he should stop being so bloody pompous and ask some normal people what they think of other religions. I bet most of them will say "Beats the shit outta me, Salman", which pretty much blows a hole in his entire argument except, of course, if there are no "true believers" among "normal people".

Maybe he doesn't know any normal people. You do though (if USMB could be called normal).

Do you find that all people of faith on religious threads try to disprove the existence of other Gods, or is it more likely the atheists that try to disprove the existence of all Gods?

I know what I think. We both know what Rushdie thinks. What about you?

 

[Avatar4321]

Debating religion is just a grown up version of the schoolyard debate of: my daddy can pound your daddy. Ever notice how the intelligent kids never got drawn into that? it was always the dumber obnoxious kids.
Debating passages from the bible is like trekkies debating what the real language of klingons. Fictitious and futile.

Your dad has sex with other men???

How many intelligent people state that their father is gay in an example to support their theories?

I agree that debating passages from the Bible is often pointless. You have to read them before you can interpret them. And unfortunately the so called "intellectual kids" never bother to read something before forming opinions on why they shouldnt read it.

 

[Gunny]

RGS: Look up red shift, the expanding universe, background radiation...

The expanding universe is illogical. If one cannot pinpoint the center of the universe, and the boundaries, then it cannot be proven.

JBeukema Hi, you have received -13 reputation points from JBeukema.
Reputation was given for this post.

Comment:
facts cannot be illogical

What a goober reason to neg someone. Facts are not facts without evidence to support them. The expanding universe is a theory. It is indeed NOT fact. You rep comment does not refute my original statement.

Science itself dictates that for something to expand, there must be something to measure. You need boundaries and something beyond the boundaries to expand into. Neither are proven fact.

If so, I'm all ears. Present me with factual evidence that locates the boundaries of the universe, and what lies beyond ... and factual evidence that pinpoints the exact location within the universe it is expanding from.

Should be easy if it's "fact."

 

[AllieBaba]

Crickets.

 

[JBeukema]

The universe isn't expanding 'from' a central location, genius. It's spacetime itself that's expanding, not just matter flying out from a central location through spacetime in a static universe. Your ignorance of the most fundamental principles of the sciences you try to be a smart-ass about is astounding

 

[AllieBaba]

That's your opinion, not evidence.

Provide the evidence, hypocrite.

 

[JBeukema]

I already have

If you want more ind-depth explanations of the physics and cosmology of the matter, i recommend Google

 

[Coloradomtnman]

JBeukema Hi, you have received -13 reputation points from JBeukema.
Reputation was given for this post.

Comment:
facts cannot be illogical

What a goober reason to neg someone. Facts are not facts without evidence to support them. The expanding universe is a theory. It is indeed NOT fact. You rep comment does not refute my original statement.

Science itself dictates that for something to expand, there must be something to measure. You need boundaries and something beyond the boundaries to expand into. Neither are proven fact.

If so, I'm all ears. Present me with factual evidence that locates the boundaries of the universe, and what lies beyond ... and factual evidence that pinpoints the exact location within the universe it is expanding from.

Should be easy if it's "fact."

You're right about the reason you were neg-repped, but, sorry about this Gunny, but JBeukema is right. It IS fact that the Universe is expanding, not a theory. The light of almost all stars is slightly to more than slightly red shifted because of the Doppler effect because of the expansion of space/time between all things. There is no central area from which the expansion is spreading unless you consider our perspective, which makes it appear as though everything is moving away from us because of expansion of space/time all around us (and all around all things). So no matter where you are in the Universe, it appears as though everything else is expanding away from you in all directions.

There are no boundaries to the physical Universe because there is nothing physical outside of space/time (if you're speaking spiritually, that would be another matter!); not even emptiness. There is no place to go outside of the Universe in a corporeal form. Anyway, the Universe is expanding to fast to catch up to its boundaries if it had them.

 

[AllieBaba]

I already have

If you want more ind-depth explanations of the physics and cosmology of the matter, i recommend Google

Likewise I recommend Google if you want more evidence from those who believe there's a God.

We actually have eye witness accounts of the miracles and corroborating evidence which supports the accuracy of the Bible...but that's all been gone over before.

Resume trolling. I don't think you could annoy anyone more than you already have.