Discussion » Nonsense » Religions

  • Jimi
    Jimi wrote:
    after reading many books, talking to many people and thinking this shit over for about 25 years. I've come to the conclusion that its all a mess and I can find none that suit me. So what now?? Do you have one?
  • ****
    **** wrote:
    Yes, me too i spoke too many people from different horizons but tey are so stuborn they cannot admit they are wrong to someone that don't believe.

    what you have to ask to yourself is:DO YOU NEED IT?
    Idon't so i don't believe an i'm more happy like that, only destiny matter in this life
  • Yuki Inés
    Yuki Inés wrote:
    Children, TV and God, those things are made for lazy peole who want to live easier.
    Muriel Barbery如是说~ Though her novel is kinda shit, this sentence is kinda true.

    I guess I am just one of those lazy people. I believe in too many different things in different religions, buddism, Zen or Shintoism. But, who the hell say religious people must join certain kind of groups?!
  • Mohammed Abdi
    Mohammed Abdi wrote:
    religions are beyond reasoning, it is about faith
    that said, discussing it will be futile
  • Minger
    Minger wrote:
    Astaroth, you need religion to keep you from becoming a nationalist fucktard. Most people are stupid and need to put their faith in something that's full of crap to find some reason to live, and religion is marginally better than nationalism.
    If you can avoid religion and don't have the urge to start claiming that your country is stronger than other countries and could beat them in wars, then by all means, please do.

    I do try to live by the golden rule though, which is based in logic, not religion. Treat other people how you wish they would treat you in the same situation". Most religions tend to contain this rule, as they were started with good intentions, but were then abused and twisted into evil things.
  • Magnus Lønn
    Magnus Lønn wrote:
    Religion is just a form of control for the masses and a throw back to the bronze age. Promoting outdated ideals, racism, homophobia and other such garbage. And curbing independant thought.

    As Vancall said "religions are beyond reasoning, it is about faith" you cannot view a religion logically as it is not a logical process.

    In my opinion, people are allowed to believe in anything they want to believe as long as it doesn't affect other peoples lives. Religion should be constrained to homes and places of worship and nowhere else. It has no place in secular areas such as education and politics.

    As far as I'm concerned the world would be a much better place if there was no religion. But to each their own.
  • Sofia
    Sofia wrote:

    believe whatever u believe,and forgive whatever u can forgive
  • 爱米粒Emily
    Religion is the crutch for the crippled.
  • DonkeyTonk
    DonkeyTonk wrote:
    If your confident in your own morals and aren't too worried what's going to happen after death, then I'd say you don't really need religion and are far better off investing your time in some other Hobby.
  • wrote:
    Chris Watts

    "Religion should be constrained to homes and places of worship and nowhere else. It has no place in secular areas such as education and politics."

    "As far as I'm concerned the world would be a much better place if there was no religion. But to each their own."

    I totally agree with you.
  • MoMo
    MoMo wrote:
    宗教是一种教育。比如说佛教,就是佛陀的教育。那是一些领悟了生命真谛的人为后人留下的教育。他的学生们也有学习不好的,也有完全误会他的意思的,导致很多人对宗教有误会。跟何况还有搞政治的利用宗教。人如果没有宗教情节岂不天不怕地不怕。我觉得没有宗教情结的世界是很可怕的。
  • MoMo
    MoMo wrote:
    Yuki,禅是佛教的派别之一。一般人现在信的是净土。
  • Minger
    Minger wrote:
    Peter 卫环琅 写道:A lack of religion doesn't make you a nationalist.

    Of course. I believe I did qualify the statement by saying that I totally support our friend having no religion as long as he doesn't turn nationalist. It's just that I've noticed a disturbing amount of nationalism in the the only country I've spend a long time living in that's not full of religious nonsense, so maybe I'm making unfair conclusions based on my very limited experience.


    Peter 卫环琅 写道:I don't like this argument [that people are stupid and need religion to find a reason to live]: a denunciation of mankind in general, and a justification for religion.

    We can agree to disagree on the first point. I haven't been very impressed by mankind yet. On the second point though, I was in no way trying to justify religion, I just don't have a better way to explain it.

    Peter 卫环琅 写道:Who's to say what's better or worse? They're both proud expressions of ignorance.

    To be sure. However, as I mention below, religion tends to have a basis in the golden rule, and thus I feel that at some point after doing unspeakable things in its name, zealots might realize that their actions are in direct defiance of this rule, and would stop. Nationalists, however, do not have such a basis, and I feel that the notion of "do whatever the country orders" may have worse effects than listening to an organization that claims to speak for God, but has "be good" as its original basis. It's entirely debatable though, especially in the case of religious states.

    Peter 卫环琅 写道:I wouldn't say [the golden rule is] "based in logic." The current theory is that human morality evolved along with us: social primates that learned to survive in groups -- at first small ones (bands/tribes) and then large ones (cities/nations), which require different codes of conduct (the bigger the group, the more laws).

    I think we actually agree. There was nothing illogical about your statement, so I don't see how this isn't based on logic. We function in societies because its better for our survival, and we follow the rules in society because it's better for the society's survival. Makes perfect sense. If I went around pillaging and raping, I would quickly meet a swift end or be outcast and eaten by pandas. I certainly wouldn't be able to realize the benefits of society.

    So what's your suggestion the thread creator? Don't be an idiot?
  • Arlen Syver Wasserman
    To those here knocking religion and saying people who need religion are "crippled" I say to you, you are narrow minded. Many people who live lives full of sin and do things bad for them and bad to other people convince themselves there is no god, there is no moral authority, and therefore what I do has no consequence. These people are offended by the idea that other people believe in something that they don't. I don't understand this, I don't care if you don't believe, so why should you care if I do?

    To the poster, I can suggest to you two options. First is finding a religion which appeals most to you above others regardless of disagreements you may have with doctrine or fellow practitioners. This is useful because for many people, they feel lost. We are swiming in a veritable sea of religious ideals. People are to unique to agree with everything one set doctrine states. I myself am a catholic, I go to church, I do not agree with no birth control, but I still go.

    The other thing I can suggest is continue looking. I have a minor in religious studies, and have taken classes in buddhism, judaism, christianity, islam, and hinduisim. I have found things I like in all, and things I don't. In this case you can develop your own religion. Why not? The human experience has created countless religions so why is it so much of a stretch to say that your human expirience gives you a unique insight into the greater power wich influences our lives. Maybe you think Christ is awesome, but I think I've lived previous lives. Cool.

    I say live your life, study the religious expirience, go to church, temple, whatever and learn from the people who have been studying it all their lives. And don't feel to much pressure in picking one, maybe go to them all. Maybe don't go at all and pray or meditate in your own home. Just don't give up!
  • wrote:
    Peter,

    "Nobody is offended by the idea that you believe in something."
    But I found most irreligious people are bothered by those religious people, because irreligious people are thought to have no so-called belief.

    "Develop a personal moral code? We all do. It doesn't have to be supernatural."
    Yes, we all do. It is the essence of Confucianism to be moral to be a perfect man, that's why I thought Confucianism is far more suitable for common people than religions after I read Lunyu and Bible. That is only my personal feeling.
  • wrote:
    Sorry, I did not read what John Freimuth said, and I just read what you wrote, haha
    I will read what he said later, because he worte too much.
  • Arlen Syver Wasserman
    Peter, I would not say I believe that atheists are jealous, merely callous. Beliving in religion and higher power implies that those beliefs hold atheists in condemnation.Wich is partly true. I myself have meta variety of atheists and their take on religion, of course not all are the same. But I do believe many athiests do feel that all religious people or at least some of them because of their beliefs are in conflict with atheism. Wich is partly true. As a catholic, we believe in one church, and if you are not apart of it, then unfortunately you go to hell.

    Now you tell me how an atheist would not take offense to that. And that is the idea of many christian religions, if Christ is not your savior, then you dont have very good prospects in the afterlife. For these reasons I believe atheists feel they need to confort religion as aposed to ignoring any cultural stigma. However I will restate that I have no problem with athiests, I do believe they can have a good afterlife if they are good people, but we don't need to fight about our beliefs, comon people.
  • Arlen Syver Wasserman
    "Invent ghost stories about Thor and Zeus? Creepy.

    Develop a personal moral code? We all do. It doesn't have to be supernatural."

    You make it sound a lot more rediculous than it actually is. For one who does feel that religion is right for them, but can't find a perfect alignment with their beliefs and a particular institution, it is the best option for still being what many call spiritual.

    Many people say, I'm spiritual but not religious. This simply means the complex nature of my experiences and beliefs canot reconcile with an institution. So I will go my own way.
  • Minger
    Minger wrote:
    Sun wrote: "It is the essence of Confucianism to be moral to be a perfect man"

    I think Confucius is the historical figure who has had the worst impact on all of Chinese society, including anyone from the last century. He encouraged blind obedience to authorities, and I honestly think he can take a good part of the blame for the current state of Chinese critical thinking. Yes Confucianism doesn't encourage belief in a supernatural "flying spaghetti monster" (google it), but I don't think its a significantly better alternative code to live by.

    John Freimuth wrote: "Many people say, I'm spiritual but not religious. This simply means the complex nature of my experiences and beliefs canot reconcile with an institution. So I will go my own way."

    I completely agree with this. Although I disagree in principle with the idea that someone subscribe to something not based in demonstrable reality, I think it makes much more sense to believe in your own religion than to accept one of the established ones.
    No matter what religion you believe in, you disagree with at least 50% of all the people in the world who believe in something else. Why believe in one religion just based on the idea that other people believe in it? Unless you actually believe 100% of what the pyramid scheme of Scientology tells you, it definitely makes more sense to start your own belief system.

    Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go lobby for the flying spaghetti monster to be taught in schools as a scientific alternative to evolution.

  • Minger
    Minger wrote:
    Thank you Yes Sir.

    "Religion is a set of beliefs, feelings, dogmas and practices that define the relationship of humans with the sacred or divine."
    http://www.theanimalaidysite.com/movie.php?id=AfpP9Gj7FaE

    Google seems to be having problems that prevent me from finding the rest of this quote.
  • Rebecca Arnesen
    Organised religion seems to have largely been co-opted by "the powers that be", a glaring example being the Roman Catholic church. This and other such organisations seem massively preoccupied with convincing everyone that the "beliefs" they hold are true, and those of others are false. They seem to have moved away from what i believe the "great sages" such as jesus and buddha were trying to do, which, i believe, was help each person gain insight on reality themselves.

    What difference could it make what you think about how the earth was created, which prophet was most important, or which meats you should eat on any particular day? If there is a God who condemes you for not knowing the unknowable, then he's a trickster bastard god and can go to hell if you ask me.

    Surely how you choose to live your life and how you let yourself feel is the most important thing?
  • Nixul
    Nixul wrote:
    Astaroth: What books did u read made u come to the conclusion that its all a mess and u can find none that suit you?
  • Da Fan
    Da Fan wrote:
    有些人信某种宗教,很正常;有些人不信任和宗教,也很正常。但是,信宗教的人非说不信宗教的人没有信仰,这就不对了~
  • Da Fan
    Da Fan wrote:
    huh?
  • Petter Meisfjordskar
    There is no need to have a religion. The whole issue is having faith. Religion is a way to God. So even if you do not have it, but have faith in God, you will meet me in heaven. Poeple that lived before Jesus did not have religions, but some of them went to heaven, like prophet Elijah, Abraham etc. I usually see them when i pass by.
  • Yuki Inés
    Yuki Inés wrote:
    @sophie,虽说是净土宗,但是中国人信的更多是佛教和地方宗教结合的东西吧。。。我比较喜欢的是学说,而不是教派,可能。
  • Petter Meisfjordskar
    Yuki, can you write in English? Do not be selfish fair lady.
  • Yuki Inés
    Yuki Inés wrote:
    I wrote in English, but just replied Sophie so changed to Chinese. I said,

    It is said that most chinese believe in Pure Land Buddism, but for me their/our belief is more of a combination of Pure-Land symbols and local believes. You can see people go to temple giving wishes, but wishes themselves has nothing to do with the believes/theories in Pure Land books. In some cases, religions turn into superstitions.

    And, actually I incline to certain sect of buddism...but i am not sure which one. So I'd rather say I love certain theories from Zen and Shintosm. Instead of a buddism believer.
  • Nadia Scheie
    Nadia Scheie wrote:
    I believe seagod
  • A豆腐
    A豆腐 wrote:
    Have a religion is not like go to the shopping mall and buy one suit.
  • Nixul
    Nixul wrote:
    Astaroth: What books did u read made u come to the conclusion that its all a mess and u can find none that suit you?
  • Joakim Berg Solum
    I never understood religion or even atheism. If I had to label myself, I'd say I'm agnostic. I know that religions are generally based on faith: religion without faith is just a moral code... but what bothers me is how people can put faith in something they cannot see evidence of.

    The afterlife for example... there is no possible way any human can know if there is an afterlife or not since it requires dying, and the dead can't tell us anything. Yet so many people firmly believe in an afterlife, sometimes a very specific one too such as heaven and hell, or reincarnation.

    I just don't understand where the faith comes from. How can someone just believe that they will go to heaven because they believe in Christ without having any evidence of this other than what their church preaches to them? Or that they will be reincarnated as a slug for being evil or a successful person if they are good... it just boggles my mind. I personally feel that the very best we can do is to say that we just don't know and probably will never know.
  • 残乐
    残乐 wrote:
    well I actually dont believe any of them either. but I think the idea of “onthing suits you" has already told that you actyally consider yourself as the center of the universe, you basically will only believe in yourself. ppl like you will never have a religion, nor will let others to guide their path.... lol

    hey I am not here to judge(honestly I myself only believe in myself too)
  • Rebecca Arnesen
    if i never get married, then its ok to have sex right? because then you can't really call it sex BEFORE marriage if there is no actually marriage afterwards. So, I don't go to hell right?
  • Nixul
    Nixul wrote:
    Great but with all the respect I owe you, I'll suggest u to update urself and try to focus on those Sacred Books God has revealed to His Messengers and go tru them carefully. I think it'll help u to better understand what religion is. My elder brother Astaroth says: " its been over a period of 25 years" well I suppose u were just 18 or less, personally man at that age it's really hard to understand things about religion, u were young not that mature enough to have a deep understanding about what religion is that's why I think that u r mistaken somewhere. Religion is just a way of life man regulated by some rules. My friend if u still remember very well those books u read I think none of them ask you to: Disrespect your parents, to disrespect other people, to Kill someone without reason, to lie, to have sex with girls before getting married etc.... So what's bad with religion Astaroth
  • Magnus Lønn
    Magnus Lønn wrote:
    Jon Gu: "but what bothers me is how people can put faith in something they cannot see evidence of."

    But that is the essence of faith is it not? Choosing to believing in something that cannot be proven? If we could prove it, then it would be called knowledge.

    I do agree with you though, I won't believe in something unless it can be scientifically proven that it actually exists. And even then, I may only accept it but not believe in it.

    For example, an old book written by man is not proof of a celestial being in any way. Especially considering it was written by man. Man is immoral, greedy, power hungry and corrupt.

    Also if god himself came down from the heavens to tell me he exists I would grant him that. I would believe he exists, but I would not worship him. Based on the worlds history he's been a pretty shitty god.






  • 爱米粒Emily
    John Freimuth wrote: "As a catholic, we believe in one church, and if you are not apart of it, then unfortunately you go to hell. Now you tell me how an atheist would not take offense to that. And that is the idea of many christian religions, if Christ is not your savior, then you dont have very good prospects in the afterlife. "

    Now let me tell you why an atheist would not take offense to that. Because we don't believe in afterlife.

    P.S. "if you are not apart of it, then unfortunately you go to hell", now who seems to be the one that's actually insecure and offended anyway?
  • Nadia Scheie
    Nadia Scheie wrote:
    IF i died~I just died~disappeared~ god is a kind of rely of spirit. sort of
    self deception~~~~~~but more easy for forgiven urself~~~coz they think god already forgiven them~~so the feeling of guilty not much as a person who feel self accusation .
  • Hans Petter Bjørgen Hansen
    I think all religions say the same thing... essentially... with a bunch of extra crap written by people.

    All that matters is having faith, believing in yourself and humanity and the betterment of everyone. I believe we're all connected at some level, (soul, collective subconscious, whatever you want to call it), and that what happens in the world is directly affected by this "global will." Miracles happen when those with an exceptional connection with this omnipresent "god" influence it to do what was otherwise unthinkable. On the other hand, you get those that "sell their soul" in order to get personal gain at any cost in the same manner.

    Heaven or hell or any of the other states of afterlife are simply what you create for yourself. At the time of death there is still some brain activity, which could be a dreamlike state (basically timeless, if you've ever experienced those long intricate dreams only to realize you were asleep for a short minute you know what I'm talking about), and based on your life experience this "eternity" could be an interpretation of that life... At that point your energy starts to be recycled into the earth as your body decomposes..

    Either way... shouldn't need a book telling you to be good... it just seems like the right thing to do. The problem in religions is they don't often preach acceptance... that's what's needed in the end. No matter what you choose to believe, or if you choose to not believe, we're all just people and we should all respect that...

    Of course... if people didn't disagree about religion, they'd find something else to disagree on... Sad human nature..
  • Cassandra Stensland
  • 随便叫兽
    随便叫兽 wrote:
    I think secular society ought to be as accommodating toward religion as it is toward sodomy and recreational drug use.

    I like religion. It's interesting, and you can't make any sense of history without knowing a thing or two about the world's many faiths. But come on, people. If you think you're in an exclusive relationship with God, you should probably keep it to yourself, because I hear that guy really gets around. It's starting to get embarrassing.
  • Arlen Syver Wasserman
    Emily wrote "Now let me tell you why an atheist would not take offense to that. Because we don't believe in afterlife.

    P.S. "if you are not apart of it, then unfortunately you go to hell", now who seems to be the one that's actually insecure and offended anyway?"

    Ok, let me clarify, I;m just hypothesising why atheists like to go onto chats with people discussing search for religion and feel compelled to tell people there is no god nor afterlife. It seems like just a mean and pointless thing to do, tell someone all their beliefs are in vain. What good does it do to you, to try and turn people away from their beliefs.

    So the only reason I can find is that atheists are simply don't like the idea that many religious people believe, "you belong in a bad place, I belong in a good place." I believe this is the simplest explanation for why athiests are so intent on turning people away from faith. Maybe if you are one of these people, you can tell me why you don't want people to seek religion.
  • Erik Aleksander Aas
    I find 90% of all posts on this thread abhorrently offensive. I got no beef with atheists, non-believers (or whatever the politically correct term is). What pisses me off is people insulting beliefs, religions, faiths and gods of others. Do your thing, live your life the way you choose to. And alternately let others follow their own path.

    Governing laws throughout the world are fundamentally based on religion more specifically the ten commandments. So keep telling yourself that it's all a load of crap. Throwing sticks and stones at believers confirms to me that you are actually the one trying really hard to convince yourself that a life with no purpose is the way it should be. Witty insults an clever twists of words to undermine others will only take you back to that shit hole you crawled out off.

    Examine this thread, identify those shooting down, insulting and slinging mud at others, in a very distasteful manner. Then decide for yourself who the real villains are.

  • Kodi
    Kodi wrote:
    Discussions about religion are not futile. We need to stop believing that discussing peoples religions and challenging their deepest faith is against the rules because it is not. Beliefs have consequences, therefore they should always be challenged. Perhaps people should not be forced to change their beliefs, but they should at least be able to be challenged.
  • Kodi
    Kodi wrote:
    Religion has caused more deaths that all wars for any other reason have or ever will. Religion starts off with good intentions and then as it gets further away from the spirit and becomes an institution this is when it gets ugly. It is just too bad we have to always disagree about the origins of life.
  • Minger
    Minger wrote:
    Yes, I believe Kodi got it right.

    I have absolutely no problem in people believing in whatever flying spaghetti monster they want, as long as they keep it to themselves and don't try to use it to influence my life.
    But, there is a problem with people accepting fundamental viewpoints without scientific evidence. If someone will accept one undemonstrable idea based on faith, what will stop them from accepting other, more dangerous ideas. It starts with "there is god", moves to "people who don't believe in god go to hell", and then ends somewhere around "no matter how many millions of people I murder, it's all ok if they don't believe in god, because they were going to spend eternity in hell anyway, and I converted some people who would have gone to hell in the process".
    For sure it's not so extreme in the case of most religious believers, but the above statement is proven in history, so it's hard to deny. I feel a world where people do what makes sense for a "harmonious" society is a lot better off than one where people do what a flying spaghetti monster wants.

    @Vincent, a life without religion is not "a life without purpose". It's just a life with a legitimate purpose, rather than a made up one. The purpose of my life is happiness, improvement of society, sustenance of the planets ecosystems, perpetuating my own existence, etc. This works for me. I'm sure the purpose of other peoples lives is different, and that's fine. Whatever reason they want to give themselves to live is great, as long as it doesn't negatively impact other people's. Obviously there are plenty of people doing bad things who don't believe in religion, but the reason they do bad things is not because they don't believe in religion.
    Don't forget that george w. bush actually talks to god, and invades countries because god wants him to.
  • 随便叫兽
    随便叫兽 wrote:
    Vincent:
    You DO NOT have the right to not be offended. You DO have the right to practice your own religion.

    If you've internalized the concept of God such that you interpret it as a personal insult when someone says He doesn't exist, then you need to check yourself, because that's arrogant as hell. I find it incredibly arrogant when religious people insist that we show special respect and reverence to their institution. It's enough to be civil to religious people. If you ask me to show respect to your institutions and your icons, you've got another thing coming.

    "Governing laws throughout the world are fundamentally based on religion more specifically the ten commandments."
    This is ridiculous. And even a bit ethnocentric. The Ten Commandments could have all developed separately as responses to real world problems, without invisible sky magician handing rocks to epic beard man.

    1.3 law-abiding atheists would like to have a word with you.



    Astaroth:
    The problems in the Middle East have as much to do with economics, land/water use, and American foreign policy as with religion.



    John:
    If people can't find value in religion on its face, without faith, then it's not useful to humans after all. Belief is so trivial. And so when the atheist shouts from on high that there is no God, he is doing a public service by making people question their superstitions. This world becomes more valuable when we realize that it's the only one we've got.

    Belief is such a small part of religious experience. Not all religions rely on blind faith and obedience to impart their wisdom, particularly the eastern ones. In fact, "salvation through faith alone" is more of a Protestant concept than a Catholic one.

    Have you read any of the apocrypha? You know, Thomas got his own Gospel. It seems that reserving judgement until presented with hard evidence isn't all that bad, and is in fact quite rewarding.
  • Rebecca Arnesen
    哈哈 Old Tony "I'm a pretty straight kinda guy" Blair pulled a similar thing. Amazing how many power hungry war mongering pricks this God fella hangs out with. Was it God that said they had WMDs?

    This is just an attack on these political figures, not on religion. Its just a shame that it worked so well in duping so much of the christian population of America. Thats abusing the power of religion, I suspect organised religion was set up for exactly that reason unfortunately.

    Still, i think there are subtles to life that science, of which i'm a big fan, can't really answer. these are still worth exploring...

    Also those who say its religion that kills the most, never forget our comrades Stalin Mao Pot and the likes who did really rather well on that score without religion.
  • 随便叫兽
    随便叫兽 wrote:
    ^^ 1.3 BILLION law-abiding atheists would like to have a word with you.
  • 随便叫兽
    随便叫兽 wrote:
    Mmmhmm. Even the dirty red in me has a hard time blaming religion for ANY wars, because they were all class struggles, after all.

    Religion doesn't cause anything because it isn't real. It's more correct to say that religious differences simply magnify conflicts that already exist, because religious people are easily manipulated by people with authority.
  • Hans Petter Bjørgen Hansen
    ^ correction.. "because people are easily manipulated by people with authority"

    I also disagree with institutionalized religion, and I agree with what you're saying... but in the end it just comes down to those with power manipulating the masses based on religion, nationality, beliefs (political, economic, etc), race... or any other reason in order to achieve what they want.

    People will always disagree and and find their disagreements reason enough to take it on a "you must see the world like I do, even if I have to kill you" Religion is just used as a tool for the same...

    As for those that choose to follow a book written by men... I don't mind what you believe, but you shouldn't be insulted when someone challenges those beliefs. You should just stand by what you believe... and not try to instil your beliefs onto others... although you can challenge the beliefs of others. Of course, those that don't believe shouldn't challenge beliefs simply for the sake of proving them wrong. Talking about religion should simply be about enlightening oneself and appreciating a different point of view....

    Of course, it all returns to the same problem... too often discussions turn into a "I'm right, you're wrong, and I will try to make you see it my way" type of discussion...
  • Erik Aleksander Aas
    @Kodi, Astoroth and 莫明 ; Religion does not kill people. People kill people! I have no problem admitting that religion has been heavily corrupted. People use religion to implement their own economic or power chasing agendas. Don't blame religion. Blame those who shamelessly abuse religion to manipulate others to perform their horrible deeds in their quest for ultimate power. Murderers and cold blooded killers would attempt to convince you that "God told me to do it". You gonna believe them too?
    Of course religion has to be challenged. But do so in a constructive manner. Be specific in your accusations and disagreements. Blindly hurling insults is definitely not the way to go. I am religious. Yet I can write a 20 page essay on what I believe is wrong about religious institutions today!

    @Dando Z; I honestly don't feel a bit of offense when people say "God does not exist". They have the right to believe what ever they want. I have family and friends that are atheists. Yet we can sit down and have a very positive discussion on the issue. What offends or insults me is when people start calling God a prick or drunken whore. I'm not asking you or anyone to respect my religion or God, rather show some respect towards me as a person with certain beliefs which are dear to me - just as I respect you as person! Fundamentally our believes, lifestyles and morals shape the person that we are. So when people insult my beliefs. lifestyle and morals I take it as a direct attack on me as a person. You'd be lying to yourself if you claim that you don't feel a bit offended when people insult your lifestyle.
    Have you ever heard of symbolism. From your posts I gathered that you are a talented and experienced writer, thus I'm certain you do know. The Bible is a book. Don't literally quote verses in the Bible every time you need to give your arguments a bit more substance. On the fact that I claimed that governing laws is fundamentally based on religion/the ten commandments. Law is an institution with a set of rules that have to be obeyed and if not punishment will be bestowed as seem fit. It's a human system. But just like religion it has primary rules (very similar to the 10 commandments) and punishment. The fact that you don't see the affinity boggles my mind.
  • Hans Petter Bjørgen Hansen
    I think you mean "And just like religion.." since religion is also a human system, with guidelines of how to live which for the most part are common sense.. such as not killing, not stealing, essentially not doing anything that would directly affect others in a negative way. Of course then come the rules based on personal (for the writers) taste, which are all in a more greyish area, such as sex before marriage, or having multiple wives, adultery... which just like in the law system come to create all the conflict.
  • 随便叫兽
    随便叫兽 wrote:
    Vincent:
    God isn't a person. He's a fictional character. If it turns out He exists, I hope He's flattered by artistic depictions of him as a tragically flawed but well-intentioned cosmic entity. I'm sure He's better at handling criticism than the people who claim to speak for Him.

    Hammurabi would like to have a word with you, too. So religious and secular law are similar in that they are punitive (in itself, not a good thing). That doesn't mean that all the laws of the world are derived from the Ten Commandments. Systems of law existed before Moses walked off of Mount Sinai.

    That said, if you're the type of person who never criticizes other people's morals or lifestyles, then you're probably not one of the Christians any of us are talking about. Refraining from casting stones is a Christ-like trait, and I think it's far more important to live like the man than to insist that other people show respect to mere symbols.
  • Minger
    Minger wrote:
    @Vincent "Religion does not kill people. People kill people! I have no problem admitting that religion has been heavily corrupted."

    This is just the problem though. If we agree that there is a god that we can't prove or disprove because we just believe in it based on faith, then where does it end?

    Who are you to say that that ol' george is a corrupt bastard who twisted religion to his political aims? Maybe God really told him he had to kill Saddam Hussein and destabilize Iraq.

    Once we accept one thing without evidence, it's opening up Pandora's box. Maybe your god is Benevolent and doesn't tell the president to start wars, but someone else's god wants everyone to believe in Jesus.

    We are all much better off if everyone bases their actions on evidence, rather than magic. It's hard to validate something that has its fundamental basis outside of reality.
  • A豆腐
    A豆腐 wrote:
    one life, maybe 70 years,
    1 year = +/- 365 days
    70x365 days= +/- 25550 days
    1 day= 24 hours, so 25550 x 24= 613200 hours
    1hour= 60 s, 613200 x 60 = 36792000 s
    the half of this time for sleep and the things of the bathroom (clean ur face, ur body, doing caca, ....)
    18.396.000 s
    Probably have a job (of the kind of alienation work, working like a slave), maybe 9 hours, during 35 years, this is +/- (there are holidays) 689000 s
    17.707.000 s free
    but, take away the time to buy food to cook, and rest from the stress of the fucking job, two hours into this? during 45 years? 1.971.000s
    15.736.000 s
    do u want children? 18 years, maybe 2 per day (for not be bad parents)
    78.8400 s
    so, in the end,

    14.947.600 s ...... and the seconds are like sand falling from your hands, 1, 2, 3, .....they don´t stop

    Who has time for a religion? really, Is there a masochist who wants more alienation out of work or this life?
    ¿Quién cojones tiene tiempo para una religión hoy en día?
  • Petter Meisfjordskar
    The truth is that you can never trust anything about religion. As i was about to believe in Christianity, i learnt that Jesus' story was corrupted from the Mithra and Mithraic beliefs. I gave up.
  • Erik Aleksander Aas
    Although I don't necessarily agree with all your arguments lads I can definitely understand and accept your reasoning. It makes sense to me but I still choose to stick with my beliefs. Religion is such a vast field with so many variables that have to be considered. The discussion was fun though and it's always informative to hear other peoples' views and opinions. Some friendly advice though, leave the insults at the door the next time you're involved in such a heated debate. Let's agree to disagree.
    On second thought, we could solve the matter at Pete's WLIB Cage Match! (or you could just join me in attending Sunday's service...hahahaha)
  • Arlen Syver Wasserman
    Dando Z wrote "If people can't find value in religion on its face, without faith, then it's not useful to humans after all. Belief is so trivial. And so when the atheist shouts from on high that there is no God, he is doing a public service by making people question their superstitions. This world becomes more valuable when we realize that it's the only one we've got"

    I think you make a mistake by not finding any value in religion. Regardless of whether there is afterlife or not, many people in jail have found religion to turn their lives around. I know many will retort, that bad people also do bad things with religion, but I believe this is just bad people doing bad things that they really want to do anyway.

    Lets look at this then, If you are right, there is no god, and all my praying and meditation has been in vain, my advice to seek and study religion has had no consequence.

    If I am right, and there is an afterlife, your actions only have served to harm and cause distruction to what I believe to be the imortal soul.

    Now you can say I don't believe in it so I don't care, but the original post was looking for constructive advice in seeking religion, I don't see the need for people to come in and say, don't bother its a waste of time.
  • Joakim Berg Solum
    I've heard this argument many times before too: I believe in God and you don't... if I'm wrong, I just wasted a lot of time and effort praying to an invisible man. If you're wrong, you're going to burn in hell for eternity... so it's safer to just believe.

    Doesn't this just make picking a religion sort of a gamble? You just try to pick the safest one, the one where the likely future benefits are the greatest. Then it's not faith anymore, it's just basically an investment, like picking stocks. At least with stocks you can do some analysis and make a somewhat educated choice.

    As far as people turning their lives around... religion is just one path towards redemption. I believe that most people who "find God" are actually just finding themselves. Sure they can say that it was faith in Christ that turned them around (or Allah or Vishnu, or whatever) but something inside of them had to turn first to even accept this. A reformed criminal has recently accepted a new moral/ethical code that just happened to be part of a religion... even if he were "religious" before, he may not have fully embraced the moral aspect of it, as evidenced by his incarceration.

    Sorry for the poor wording of the above paragraph by the way...
  • NN
    NN wrote:
    I still think that religition is ONLY for the spiritual consolation
  • Mr SHORT CUT
    Mr SHORT CUT wrote:
    Here he rests
    The old nightingale
    In its peace and grave,
    From the descendants
    Of an old tribe and its code
    The old settlers, at the outskirts
    Through years of travel
    The poet, in mausoleum of words

    The old Pushtu poet
    Carried in his words,
    The echoes of peace and music
    The Old Sufi
    Carried in his soul,
    The echoes of unity and humility
    From the old rivers to its tribes
    The imagination that were to capture
    For centuries across the time
    The old love affair,
    With land and its descendants
    Now lies in ruins, his words,
    The resting place, in holes

    Call they themselves
    The proponents of change
    By destruction and rope,
    By death and by smoke
    The old echoes still there,
    In those fallen grounds
    Live I not in the mausoleum
    But in those hearts
    Of millions that came,
    And millions that are now
    Never will you succeed,
    I am them and they are me,
    Bounded by the music
    And the legends of this place
    Mountains are my witness
    And my words, the echo
    Of distant past and now yours,

    What is it you gained, if gain it is you say,
    Maimed you have the old past and its land
    The brutality of invaders to the heart that is stone
    Inside you, as you have killed yourself
    Worry not for me, but for the future ahead
    I will always be there in my words
    See you must with your own soul
    Those moments of peace
    As I hear your footsteps in my awake
    I am already dead, what more can you do
    Killed you have yourself, as I cry for you
    In my words, in my land, of distant times
    Now the playground, for devil to claim
    The imaginary stakes and the real crimes
    Remember, it’s in you, the old music
    Claim it, the nightingales of time!
  • 叮噹叔叔 (令狐叮噹)
    ...

    Hahahaha ... my own simple (perhaps naive) conclusion ...

    At the end, religion is just an ideal that people choose to believe and follow, and by definition, I would consider Maoism and Communism as religions as well, but that may be just me ...

    I agree with Diego that people should be allowed to freely believe, as long as it does not affect anyone ... and preach, as long as it does not become annoying ... and practice, so long as it does not disturb or disrupt the public safety ... and also to be challenged, this being that no ideal is perfect and can ever be realised ...

    Heehee... have I made any sense at all?
  • Simon Frederic
    Everyone knows that A giant masked Cucumber with eight arms carrying auspious kitchenware rules above this dimension.
    It is known.
    For there exist two seperate thread of existence - the absolute and the relative-.
    Who can pretend, when living in a relative world, to understand the mighty mind of the absolute Cucumber?

    And the little fish said: and if my god were water- would it matter denying or worshipping?
    Would it get angry, sweet, ot disappear?


  • Minger
    Minger wrote:
    Simon, you are wrong. It is a giant, flying inter-dimensional invisible spaghetti monster that rules over all! He demands the homage of followers of the false-idol giant cucumber.
    And something about pirates.
  • 叮噹叔叔 (令狐叮噹)
    ...

    Pirates? Hook? or Sparrow?
  • Petter Meisfjordskar
    @Vincent Van Wyk
    I want you to agree with me that the ten commandments were corrupted from the laws that existed, not the other way round. These laws, if you read the Bible, will find out that they were there before. An example i can give you is that, before christianity went to different parts of the world like Africa, they had similar laws. But they had never learnt about christianity. Some of their laws included 1 Respecting the parents, 2 Not killing each other, 3 Belief in the god, whatever "God" they had, 4 Not to commit adultry, that is why if a man felt like having another lady, it was accepted for him to be polygamous but not to commit adultry. 5 Not to steal. Thieves were delt with severly. Etc. The ten commandments were given to human race that had already existed with their own laws. It was just a summary of the existing laws.
    Jah Bless.
  • Minger
    Minger wrote:
    Pastafarian Pirates, I believe.

    "I am writing you with much concern after having read of your hearing to decide whether the alternative theory of Intelligent Design should be taught along with the theory of Evolution. I think we can all agree that it is important for students to hear multiple viewpoints so they can choose for themselves the theory that makes the most sense to them. I am concerned, however, that students will only hear one theory of Intelligent Design.

    Let us remember that there are multiple theories of Intelligent Design. I and many others around the world are of the strong belief that the universe was created by a Flying Spaghetti Monster. It was He who created all that we see and all that we feel. We feel strongly that the overwhelming scientific evidence pointing towards evolutionary processes is nothing but a coincidence, put in place by Him."

    http://www.venganza.org/about/open-letter/
  • Arlen Syver Wasserman
    Jon wrote"I've heard this argument many times before too: I believe in God and you don't... if I'm wrong, I just wasted a lot of time and effort praying to an invisible man. If you're wrong, you're going to burn in hell for eternity... so it's safer to just believe."

    Close but again, yet another person has misinterpreted what I am saying. I am not talking about the risk of practicing or not practicing, I am talking about the debate. I am saying, if someone is looking for religion, you are doing nothing but harm in hindering their search.

    If you read my original post Jon, you would see that I did not advocate "picking" a religion or mine, but all I said was, keep looking, Use the knowledge, and lfie study of the people in various churches, use their wisdom to help develop your on beliefs, on what is required of you to lead a better life, and to be a better person.

    Bottom line, religion can help a lot of people, not any particular one, just the avenue can help people lead better lives. So what is the benefit of trying to turn people away from it.
  • wrote:
    “Bottom line, religion can help a lot of people, not any particular one, just the avenue can help people lead better lives. So what is the benefit of trying to turn people away from it.”

    Frankly speaking, it it totally false.
  • Simon Frederic
    莫明 I call a jihad on you.
    John> eternity is a long time. Especially toward the end. Third option. you are both right. Fourth Both wrong.

    Personally, I think that both 莫明 and myself are discussion something a bit less mundane here.

    (under bottom line- Sun > you do like to have the last word. I ll wait a few years and post some more things here)
  • Minger
    Minger wrote:
    Simon, the flying spaghetti monster spoke to me from a child's drawing, and told me that both pastafarians (in full pirate regalia) and believers in the (false idol) giant cucumber should unite and work together in peace.
    The great flying spaghetti monster believes that it is not important which deity you believe in (between He and the giant cucumber), but only that you believe in one of these two deities. We must declare a jihad on everyone else.
  • Simon Frederic
    HOLY WARRRRRRR!!!!
    BE PACIFIED !!!!





  • Simon Frederic
    Astaroth wrote:
    Posted 1 days ago (actually he did not write this, this part was computer generated)
    a few genocides dont equal the masses that have been slaughtered over the past 2-4000 years.

    >Heee- No- Learn math and history and you will see that last century wars and genocides have killed more people that there were in the 4000 years.
    Progress haa progress.
  • Albulena Imeri
    I should recommend this religion, "The simple life". And I got all my life questions answered from Paris.
  • Magnus Lønn
    Magnus Lønn wrote:
    Scary man, the only advice I would want from Paris is how to kill the demonic abomination that she is.
  • Albulena Imeri
    Be very scared. Just love her partying ideas.
  • Saint - Spartacus
    -Secret Sunshine (2007)
    ‘’ i killed your son,and i've forgived myself before you fogive me,as the god give me a chance to fogive myself about the sin'' what a funny idea about Religions ^^ ...


  • Simon Frederic
    Ashwr > you did not write "wrote"
    do not bring my mum here. - you are quite a naughty angry baby piglet aren't you.

    a bit off topic though. ( a long is your foot, i am bit constipated/ besides I am looking for people to spar with - never had that one tried on me though)

    Namaskara a!
  • Simon Frederic
    hope is beleiving in uncertainties. Honestly I did not bother reading your name so far.
    Consider the lillies --- perhaps you wont be that angry. You are going to seriously damage your spleen and liver doing so
  • Simon Frederic
    ashr> haha funny. sad but funny somehow. like a hamster preaching his cage.

    re-ligare let's go back to the root or source- isn't what just religion means-
    Brahaman is more or less a good definition of godhood

  • Kodi
    Kodi wrote:
    Well lets not allow this conversation get reduced into hurling insults. We can really have a chance to understand eaink about each other here.

    I think of this all of the time. Take evolution for instance: If religion in real and god is real d then does evolution just stop with humans? Did everything just come to be, so that humans can evolve at the very tip of the history of the universe and worship god? If religion is real and there is a higher power than the human mind and natural processes of the universe then who are we to believe we can understand and define this power? We have the power to imagine, therefor we imagine. I think if there is a god then we are all gods of our own realm. I am agnostic because it is the most rational belief to me. The most dependable belief to me. I like to learn about religions and understand people's rationale for their beliefs.

    The "what" when looking at someone's beliefs is not as important as the "How" So you are a christian? So what? I wanna know how you became a christian. Nobody just decides when they are born to truly adopt a faith. They must travel a long road of experiences before they develop this faith. This is a responsible way to look at religion. How you came to believe is much more important than what you believe.
  • Minger
    Minger wrote:
    I like this. It's not mine, but I don't know the source.

    Christianity;

    “The belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by talking to a snake to eat from a magical tree… yeah, that makes perfect sense.”
  • Siliconfish
    Siliconfish wrote:
    Man thinks.God laughs.
    Not mean to be rude or arrogant. Just all this cunning of taking over socalled moral high ground which is achieved by comparing to a presupposed inferior case appears to be a mental peculiarity of more and more ppl.

    The way I see it is that there are certain ambiguity ,shadows, hints, and abbreviations of things which are part of the logic and beauty of this world. Any attempt here to capture the nature or reality or the spiritual essence whatsoever of religione seems to fail. By trying too hard to signfy things,don't we lose something important in the same process...(not really a question mark here though).
  • Erik Aleksander Aas
    Proof of God - Intelligent Design
    What would constitute objective proof of God? Well, consider the following self-evident and universally recognized truth: Concept and design necessitate an intelligent designer. The presence of intelligent design proves the existence of an intelligent designer. It's simply cause and effect. In our search for proof of God's existence, we could examine the various claims of supernatural occurrences, determine whether or not these are legitimate experiences, and build a case for the existence of the supernatural, which would be a step towards identifying a supernatural Creator God. Or we can just apply what we already know and search for signs of intelligent design within creation itself.

    We know that design necessitates a designer. In fact, in accordance with this fundamental axiom, design detection methodology is a prerequisite in many fields of human endeavor, including archaeology, anthropology, forensics, criminal jurisprudence, copyright law, patent law, reverse engineering, crypto analysis, random number generation, and SETI. And how do we recognize intelligent design? In general, we find "specified complexity" to be a reliable indicator of the presence of intelligent design. Chance can explain complexity alone but not specification -- a random sequence of letters is complex but not specified (it's meaningless). A Shakespearean sonnet is both complex and specified (it's meaningful). We can't have a Shakespearean sonnet without Shakespeare. (William A. Dembski, The Design Inference: Eliminating Chance through Small Probabilities, 1998.)

    Proof of God - Nature
    So where's the proof of God's existence? In accordance with our familiar axiom and in light of the tremendous advances we've made in molecular biology, biochemistry, genetics and information theory, the proof of God is all around us!

    Through the microscope, we observe the E. coli bacterial flagellum. The bacterial flagellum is what propels E. coli bacteria through its microscopic world. It consists of about 40 individual protein parts including a stator, rotor, drive-shaft, U-joint, and propeller. It's a microscopic outboard motor! The individual parts come into focus when magnified 50,000 times (using electron micrographs). And even though these microscopic outboard motors run at an incredible 100,000 rpm, they can stop on a microscopic dime. It takes only a quarter turn for them to stop, shift directions and start spinning 100,000 rpm in the opposite direction! The flagellar motor has two gears (forward and reverse), is water-cooled, and is hardwired into a signal transduction (sensory mechanism) so that it receives feedback from its environment. ("Unlocking the Mystery of Life," video documentary by Illustra Media, 2002.)

    When we apply the general principles of detecting specified complexity to biologic systems (living creatures), we find it reasonable to infer the presence intelligent design. Take, for example, the bacterial flagellum's stator, rotor, drive-shaft, U-joint, and propeller. It is not convenient that we've given these parts these names - that's truly their function. If you were to find a stator, rotor, drive-shaft, U-joint, or propeller in any vehicle, machine, toy or model, you would recognize them as the product of an intelligent source. No one would expect an outboard motor -- much less one as incredible as the flagellar motor -- to be the product of a chance assemblage of parts. Motors are the product of intelligent design.

    Furthermore, the E. coli bacterial flagellum simply could not have evolved gradually over time. The bacterial flagellum is an "irreducibly complex" system. An irreducibly complex system is one composed of multiple parts, all of which are necessary for the system to function. If you remove any one part, the entire system will fail to function. Every individual part is integral. There is absolutely no naturalistic, gradual,
  • Erik Aleksander Aas
    evolutionary explanation for the bacterial flagellum. (Michael Behe, Darwin's Black Box, 1996.)

    The bacterial flagellum (not to mention the irreducibly complex molecular machines responsible for the flagellum's assembly) is just one example of the specified complexity that pervades the microscopic biological world. Molecular biologist Michael Denton wrote, "Although the tiniest bacterial cells are incredibly small, weighing less than 10-12 grams, each is in effect a veritable micro-miniaturized factory containing thousands of exquisitely designed pieces of intricate molecular machinery, made up altogether of one hundred thousand million atoms, far more complicated than any machinery built by man and absolutely without parallel in the non-living world." (Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis, 1986, p. 250.)

    Proof of God - His Fingerprints are Everywhere
    Where is the proof of God? If we're willing to open our eyes, we'll see the fingerprints of God all around us and all throughout us. Our very existence proves the existence of a Creator God.

    -Source: All About Creation, Proof of God - Design Detection
  • Simon Frederic
    intelligent design haha - you should meet my neighbours....

    or is it like abstract art?
  • Minger
    Minger wrote:
    Vincent, I found that very interesting.
    I did not, however, find it to be evidence of a god, or a flying spaghetti monster. It is a mechanism which, at it's face value as Mr. Denton presents it, I can't explain. There are millions of things I can't explain (the one that interests me the most is gravity), most of which I find fascinating. However, my inability to explain these things does not mean that they were "intelligently designed", and the existence of intelligent design does not indicate the existence of a god. There is simply no logical connection to Mr. Dembski's assumptions along these lines.

    Have you heard about mitochondrial DNA in humans? It indicates scientific evidence that humans are descended from the same person or clones of the same person. I haven't read into it, but I think you would find it very interesting.
  • 随便叫兽
    随便叫兽 wrote:
    Freimuth
    I hope you read the Bible more carefully than my post. I said "if" there is no other value.

    Don't try and suggest that I've closed my mind to the possibility of the existence of God. I was a deeply religious person when I was young and I continued to study religion even after I decided that the core theology of Christianity was the product of political purges within the early church. My question about apocrypha wasn't merely rhetorical. A true seeker of religious truth does not limit his search to the canonical scriptures.



    Vincent:
    Intelligent design postulates that because evolutionary biologists cannot yet explain something that is extremely complicated, God must have designed it, because there is no way it could have happened "accidentally". It doesn't prove the existence of God.

    Evolution of the Bacterial Flagella

    Might I also point out that even if intelligent design was actually valid, it still doesn't prove that the Intelligent Designer is YOUR god in particular. It could be the Flying Spaghetti Monster, an invisible pink unicorn, or my personal favorite: the Gnostic demiurge.
  • Marte Joahansen
    The basic understanding we all need to be aware of is the fact that Religion is just a term.We could call it an English word,a Greek word or whatever.
    But,it's good to have a God factor at play, which automatically brings Spirituality to the scene.
    It's nice to be spiritual and let's forget about religion.
    What matters is acknowledging the presence of a supreme being, who actually gives us life and takes it without our consent.
  • Albulena Imeri
    Tolerance and love.
  • Minger
    Minger wrote:
    Dando, after reading the evolution of the bacterial flagella that you posted, I understand why people want to believe invisible pink unicorns (although the spaghetti monster and giant cucumber would like a word with Pinkness). It's easier to just go along with everyone else's belief in a god/gods than to get through that reading.
  • Hans Petter Bjørgen Hansen
    If you want to find the creator of human beings, look at texts from Sumerian civilizations and read the old stories from the bible with a different mindset. You will easily realize that humans were created by extra terrestrials (the Annunaki) in order to do their work for them.. Since monkeys weren't smart enough for the job the Annunaki combined their DNA with the monkeys' to create humans.

    http://www.world-mysteries.com/pex_2.htm
  • 爱米粒Emily
    John Freimuth wrote:"It seems like just a mean and pointless thing to do, tell someone all their beliefs are in vain. What good does it do to you, to try and turn people away from their beliefs."

    It might be a little mean, but definitely not pointless. The point is, to make the world a better place and set people free from make-believes, or, to put it in a "mean" way, from stupidity. Religion is one of the few things on the planet that requires you to fully believe in it without being critical and questioning, which in terms turns its believers away from free-minds and free thinking. And the most scary of all is that it has been mulnipulated for political use, like, since forever ago. Why do you think Mr. George W. Bush could be elected president, twice, and why are there so many republicans (I presume you're one of them?) out there?

    As for the famous "argument", "I believe in God and you don't... if I'm wrong, I just wasted a lot of time and effort praying to an invisible man. If you're wrong, you're going to burn in hell for eternity... so it's safer to just believe." Whis is exactly why I said it's the crutch for the crippled. (And actually I didn't say it, one of your governors did.)

    莫明 wrote: I like this. It's not mine, but I don't know the source.

    Christianity;
    "The belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by talking to a snake to eat from a magical tree… yeah, that makes perfect sense."

    LOL. I like it. ;-)
  • Kodi
    Kodi wrote:
    Oh that's it. You solved it. Intelligent design is proof of god, so now I can sleep peacefully now and stop challenging my beliefs. We should also stop pursuing science and put a halt to the empirical process also because god will only let happen what is meant to happen. Thank you very much for this.

    I guess either way we are dealing with faith based assumptions to begin with weather we are dealing with religion or science, however I would rather arrive at a reliable belief in god based on the collection of empirical data instead of just believing there must be a god because I just cannot comprehend how everything came to be without one. I admit this problem persists in making my head hurt, but I refuse to throw my arms up in humiliation and merely accept the existence based on laziness and circular arguments.

    A belief in a god is only as reliable as a belief in a spaghetti monster. Test it! Oh yeah it is against the religion to test the belief. How convenient! Hmmmm should i believe in something based on a feeling or based on reliable evidence that can be tested?

    If I told you that I talked to god would you believe me? Probably not. You would send me to the psychiatrist because this goes against all conventional thought and reality right? Hmmmm why is this? If there was a god he may be dead and has left us to rot on this blue rock.

    See Carl Sagan and the cosmic perspective to see just how significant the human race really is in the grand scheme of things.
  • Magnus Lønn
    Magnus Lønn wrote:
    Oh jeez, yes but if we follow intelligent design that means the entire universe is only 5000 yrs old and man would have existed at the same time as dinosaurs. Since god created all land animals on the same day. Nothing intelligent about that.
  • Nadia Scheie
    Nadia Scheie wrote:
    muslim can have 4 wifes?
  • Nadia Scheie
    Nadia Scheie wrote:
    PS, if they wanna divorce ,they just say“we divorce ”X3 times, then divorced~
  • Petter Meisfjordskar
    @Chris Watts,
    When you talk of creation, you remind me of this thing i studied in the Bible. Why does the Bible have two creation stories? The first says man was created last. The second says man was created first. Where the people that wrote the Bible not sure?
  • Magnus Lønn
    Magnus Lønn wrote:
    The bible is written by man, therefore subject to our greeds and desires. They write it in the best way to suit their needs. What will the masses believe and what will allow me to get the most power over them.

    You know in one of the new testaments it doesn't say anything about the virgin birth. Thought that would kind of be an important thing to keep in the story.
  • Simon Frederic
    @ciaral : actually i depends on the country I.e Morocco usually 3 unless the king allows you to have more (up to five)
    you can divorce like said. 3 sms do the trick in Malaysia.

    But why on earth would someone have four wives....

    @cool : in do not recall have seen any thing in the old testament seeing than man was made first. Would be funny to read (maybe) that.
    Some bibles are often translated at one's convenience. You just have to look at all the ten ccommendements to see that they strangely differ in certain countries (notably the U.S.A) - the new testament was re-written by the romans whom were opposed what they though was a crazy sect.

    scripta manent- they say - it might be full of incoherences but the message is always the same.
    Be good to others and to yourself.
  • Petter Meisfjordskar
    @ Simon,
    if you knew the Bible well, you would not have doubted. The one i read is a Good News Bible. I wonder what you mean by translation! Do you want to mean that we should read the one that was originally written in whatever language i do not know? Refer to the GOOD NEWS BIBLE.
  • Petter Meisfjordskar
    @Simon
    http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_bibl.htm
  • Petter Meisfjordskar
    There are many apparent references in the Bible to the creation process:

    The First Creation Story; Genesis 1:1 to 2:3: Historical Christianity taught that the entire Pentateuch -- the five books from Genesis to Deuteronomy -- was written by Moses. Most Fundamentalist and other Evangelical Christians continue to follow this belief. Most liberal and mainline theologians and religious skeptics accept the Documentary Hypothesis: that the Pentateuch was written by a number of authors from four different traditions, and who imported some material from nearby Pagan sources. The Hypothesis asserts that the author of the creation story seen in the first verses of the Bible was an anonymous 6th Century BCE writer or group of writers of the priestly tradition (often referred to as "P").
    Creation is described in Genesis 1:1 to 2:3 as occurring in six "days":

    Day 1: creation of light and its separation from darkness.
    Day 2: separation of the sky and oceans.
    Day 3: separation of land from the oceans; spreading of plants and grass and trees across the land.
    Day 4: Creation of the sun, moon, and stars.
    Day 5: Creation of sea animals and birds.
    Day 6: Creation of the land animals. Creation of humanity, "someone like ourselves" (Living Bible).
    Day 7: God rested. Followers of the Documentary Hypothesis believe this to have been a later addition, 4 placed there to give theological justification for the Sabbath (Saturday as a day of rest).
    This sequence does contain some problems.

    Light was listed as being created on day 1, but its source (the sun and stars) did not appear until day 4. Most creation scientists, who generally support the literal interpretation of this creation story, have a solution to this puzzle. Many say that light initially came from God, before he created the sun and stars.

    Birds were said to be created before other land animals. Paleontologists, who almost universally support the theory of evolution, point out that the fossil record shows the opposite order. Creation scientists discount this belief. Most regard the rock layers containing the fossil record as having been laid down during the flood of Noah; thus, the fossils do not represent the evolution of the species of animals and birds.

    The most controversial debate over this creation story relates to its time span. Genesis 1 and 2 explain how Creation of Earth's life forms, the Earth itself, and the rest of the universe took six days. Supporters of the theory of evolution find evidence for a universe that has been evolving for about 14 billion years.

    The Second Creation Story; Genesis 2:4 to 2:25: This is a different description of the creation of earth's life forms. Most mainline and liberal biblical researchers attribute this section to "J," a writer who lived in the 9th century BCE (some say 10th century; others say after the Babylonian exile). Again, religious conservatives trace the authorship to Moses, and generally believe that this is a simple restatement of the earlier creation story. The author of Genesis 2 writes that
    at first, there were no plants or grain present, because God had not yet sent rain.
    God made Adam out of earth; this is a belief common to many early Pagan religions in the Middle East.
    God created plants and herbs, Adam, the Garden of Eden, trees, birds and animals
    God performed the first surgical operation, removing a rib from Adam and transforming it into the first woman, Eve.

    Conflicts between the creation stories: There are some apparent inconsistencies between the first and second creation accounts:
    There may be a conflict over the number of days over which creation happened.
    Genesis 1:3 and subsequent verses say that God created the universe in six days.
    In Genesis 2:4, some translations, including the King James Version, imply that it took one day. More details
    In the first acc
  • Petter Meisfjordskar
    @simon, ALL THESE WILL SHOW YOU THAT I AM RIGHT ABOUT THE TWO CREATION STORIES.

    http://www.sullivan-county.com/identity/2cs.htm
    http://www.skepticfiles.org/atheist/bible3do.htm
    http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_creation_stories_are_in_the_Bible

  • Nadia Scheie
    Nadia Scheie wrote:
    simon: i thought 1 wife cant make them satisfid...if they just have one wife...and just one nite thier wife will be died by xxx~ so , they can have 4 wives...for protect women..

    hahaha...............................................

  • 随便叫兽
    随便叫兽 wrote:
    Chris: There's a difference between Intelligent Design and Young Earth Creationism.

    Creationism says the Earth is only 6000 years old and ignores all scientific evidence to the contrary. Intelligent Design merely postulates that because life is complex, it must have been engineered by an intelligent entity. It's not associated with any particular religion, but religious people refer to Intelligent Design in an attempt to show that Evolution is not the only explanation for the origins of life.

    I think they're both crap, but at least Intelligent Design feigns some scientific trappings. That shit never passes peer review, though.
  • Petter Meisfjordskar
    @Ciaral,
    A muslem man first even informs you as the first wife that tomorrow he is bring your co-wife. It is by law in their religion that you prepare for the coming of the second wife like , setting where she will sleep etc. You must welcome her happily, otherwise, no heaven for you.
  • Kodi
    Kodi wrote:
    I think religion was something created through the evolutionary process in the minds of humans to help them survive. It helped many people live a regimented life with moderation and discipline. It also helped them offer explanations for processes they did not understand about the natural world. Take a look at ancient religions and you can see many similarities between them and the modern religions. However I think it is becoming a useless vestige of evolution and will soon be discarded from the human imagination all together. At least I hope so.


  • Arlen Syver Wasserman
    Emily wrote- "It might be a little mean, but definitely not pointless. The point is, to make the world a better place and set people free from make-believes."

    You have failed to make the connection from, between non-belief and a better world. I just don't see it. If everyone in the world stopped beleiving in religion. Would war end? Of course not, nationalism, racism, and many other things to take its place as a tool by ruling elite to trick weaker minds.

    "Religion is one of the few things on the planet that requires you to fully believe in it without being critical and questioning,"

    I would suggest you read my original post, my whole suggestion was on the basis of keep looking, keep studying, don't stop developing your moral/religious code and live by it.

    "which in terms turns its believers away from free-minds and free thinking."
    People who fall into the most convenient and popular religions, and believe whatever they say, where probably not free thinkers in the first place.

    "And the most scary of all is that it has been mulnipulated for political use, like, since forever ago. Why do you think Mr. George W. Bush could be elected president, twice, and why are there so many republicans (I presume you're one of them?) out there?"
    Popular misconception, I am religious, so I am a facist republican who voted for a terrible president, wrong, if you must know I vote third party, I am strongly against any state support of religion, agree with evolution. I'll bet we agree on a lot more than you think, just not the idea that people shouldn't bother looking for and studying religions.

    Btw, he got elected because of fear mongering, us being in two wars, and the other candidate was stale as week old bread
  • 随便叫兽
    随便叫兽 wrote:
    Freimuth:
    And you still haven't sold anyone on the link between faith and morality. We don't need to believe in an invisible sky magician in order to behave ethically.

    Religion doesn't prevent ethnic conflicts, and in many cases it aggravates them. It's far easier to rationalize the killing of another individual if you believe that they are evil. Western monotheism in particular tends to Other-ize non-believers in such a way.

    A survey asked Americans, "If your political party nominated a well-qualified __________ for President, would you support that candidate?".
    a) Muslim
    b) homosexual
    c) Atheist

    Guess which group Americans were least likely to accept.

    Challenging the faith of others and calling their superstitions into question is just as valuable as seeking it. In the Book of Job, Satan wasn't the Antichrist. He was just doing his appointed duty.
  • 爱米粒Emily
    John Freimuth wrote: "I just don't see it. If everyone in the world stopped beleiving in religion. Would war end? Of course not, nationalism, racism, and many other things to take its place as a tool by ruling elite to trick weaker minds."

    Good to know you agree that religion is a tool by ruling elite to trick weaker minds. Yes many other things would take its place, but hey, if a major one's elimiated, we're moving one big step forward. Had Chinese government let Google be, would you be like "What's the point? They still have the GFW out there anyways."?

    "I would suggest you read my original post, my whole suggestion was on the basis of keep looking, keep studying, don't stop developing your moral/religious code and live by it."

    I did read your original post. And I thought Peter has already said what I'm going to have to say again, that we all develop personal moral codes, and I really just wouldn't call it "religion". So if you're secretly switching the definition of "religion" to that of "moral" and then tell me that it's good to have moral and that it's pointless and mean to try to turn people away from their moral code, then wow, I really don't know what to say.

    Let's take a look at the definition of "religion". A religion is a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a supernatural agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs. (From Wikipedia)

    "I am strongly against any state support of religion, agree with evolution. "

    So you agree with evolution, AND you believe in god or any other supernatural agency, whatever you call it? Hmmm I wonder how that happened...

    By the way, I did not presume you were a republican because you are religious. I did because I saw some of your other posts in the American Healthcare thread.
  • Nadia Scheie
    Nadia Scheie wrote:
    COOL: thats never ever happen on me~~~~no way~~~im normal....
  • Nadia Scheie
    Nadia Scheie wrote:
    normal~~~~~~。。。。。。just know how to have fun in life~~never self abuse~and no religions~?but i respect ppl who has religion~
  • Nadia Scheie
    Nadia Scheie wrote:
    religion very complex。。。i dont know any about that~so i cant say any about that~~but ppl can choose believe or not~~~some religion is ok~~but you know some is horrible~~some times religion like me connect in the mind of war ,like 新疆,tibet of china~~
  • Nadia Scheie
    Nadia Scheie wrote:
    sorry~mispell“ let me” not “like me”
  • Arlen Syver Wasserman
    Emily said
    "Good to know you agree that religion is a tool by ruling elite to trick weaker minds. Yes many other things would take its place, but hey, if a major one's elimiated, we're moving one big step forward. Had Chinese government let Google be, would you be like "What's the point? They still have the GFW out there anyways."?"

    Getting rid of one tool to trick the weak minded does not get rid of the weak minded. They will still be there, willing to fight any war, for any cause, for any old reason. Especially getting rid of religion, which in the states has never been a battle cry, but more and more is becoming a humanitarian call. Look at the billions of dollars and thousands of people going to third world nations. This would certainly dissapear as well, while the stupid people misinterpreting religion will still remain to take up the causes of racism, nationalism, etc. It is human nature to create "the other," "us and them." You can't act like getting rid of one aspect of society, which also does significantly more good, especially in the united states, is a "step forward."

    Dando Z wrote "And you still haven't sold anyone on the link between faith and morality. We don't need to believe in an invisible sky magician in order to behave ethically."

    That is because I have never said it is nececary, but I do believe for many people it is sufficient. I don't believe that every person without religion cannot have solid moral fiber, and I don't believe that because you guys don't believe, you will suffer simply for not believing, but I do believe there are people out there, who may be morally lost without it. You may be the kindest, most giving person in the world and be an athiest, I have no problem with that. All I have a problem with is if someone is seriously confused, morally ambiguous, and seriously damaging their lives through their actions, people tell them don't bother with religion, you are better off without it.
  • Minger
    Minger wrote:
    Peter 卫环琅 写道:
    Emily has great points!

    Ironically, so does John Freimuth.

    Still, if I'm every single again, I'm going to marry Emily. If I'm every single and gay, I'm going to marry Peter. I'm sorry, but neither of you is getting much choice in this matter.
  • 爱米粒Emily
    John Freimuth wrote: "but I do believe there are people out there, who may be morally lost without it. You may be the kindest, most giving person in the world and be an athiest, I have no problem with that. All I have a problem with is if someone is seriously confused, morally ambiguous, and seriously damaging their lives through their actions, people tell them don't bother with religion, you are better off without it."

    So you do believe that "crippled" people should have this "crunch", because they're morally lost without it.

    @莫明, Thank you, and what a shame!
  • 随便叫兽
    随便叫兽 wrote:
    Freimuth:
    "Look at the billions of dollars and thousands of people going to third world nations. This would certainly dissapear as well, "
    Religious charities aren't the only ones out there. And the religious organizations aren't even particularly effective in dealing with issues in the developing world. For instance, the Catholic Church is completely failing to help with the AIDS epidemic in Africa, because condom use goes against its official dogma. It's actually proving to be an obstacle. Oh, but if people just hop aboard the faith train, they'll stop fucking indiscriminately. Sorry, but I'm not sold on that notion.

    It's the wealthiest religious organization in the world. Its members are among the poorest people in the world. Hmmm. Something's fishy.

    "All I have a problem with is if someone is seriously confused, morally ambiguous, and seriously damaging their lives through their actions, people tell them don't bother with religion, you are better off without it."
    Because it's a band-aid for a sucking chest wound. There are more direct ways to solve most problems.

    I got a friend who used to study pre-seminary because he wanted to help people by talking to them about their problems. Then he realized his true calling was as a sociologist.
  • Magnus Lønn
    Magnus Lønn wrote:
    Thanks Dando.

    I was confused by that because whenever a debate between Creationism and Evolution is being had, the Creationists always start tossing out Intelligent Design theories when their arguments inevitably fail. I was thinking they were the same thing.
  • Vilde Engen
    Vilde Engen wrote:
    “I don’t know if God exists, but it would be better for His reputation if He didn’t.” –Jules Renard
  • ****
    **** wrote:
    ''Religion is the worst institution that ever shone on man''
    jefferson
  • ****
    **** wrote:
    it is a matter of need, because most people that got into religions is because they feel weak at a time and are afraid to realize that there is not a superior power watching over you.

    how can you believe in a talking snake and a man living inside a ''big fish'' for three days (oh by the way jonas stories, a big fish, what is it for you?a whale right? well just ask any real religious people and they will all say no! not a whale, a big fish... oh yeah like a whale is not a big fish? well not for them it seems, maybe a gigantesque tuna)

    about the virgin birth, how can you believe in the virgin birth and by the way it is not in any jesus biography, how can't it be! isn't important like a women got pregnant without the need of a man? how often does that happen? and they don't find it weird enough to put it in, that really show that people who writes jesus biography have never meet jesus neither speaks to any of his followers which means they had no idea what they were speaking of.
    and people who writes the new testament just rewrites the old ones.

    if you look at the 10 commandements ( which are supposed to be the 10 most important christian laws) well only 2 of them are real laws which are ''don't steal'' and ''don't kill'' 2 out of ten!
    the 4 first are only about how god wants you to love only him and that is a jealous god, well it is so strange that someone who is suppose to be so powerful and so pure can have such a pity human feelings!

    and what kind of god preach common love and equality but in same time will trow you in the fire of hell if you simply choose not to believe in him like its write in the bible.

    they talk in the bible about sodom and gomohra the two infamous cities destroyed by the anger of god, actually god sent two angels to the cities first and the crowd wanted to rape them so to protect them, a man offerd to the crowds his owns daughter to rape! and he was the good guy in town as they says in the bible!

    face it, religion wants you to sacrifice yourself for it. but for why so you can start loving anyone and stop killing, well there is as much atrocities and killing as there was before and in the world civilized world we are in don't you think we would have decided by ourselfs to stop

    there is too much to say gotta go

    last thing:

    '' all lighthouses in England are more useful than all churches''
    Adams

Please login to post a reply to this thread.

WeLiveInBeijing

WeLiveInBeijing.com is a social community for people living in or traveling to Beijing.

Powered by: Bloc