Religion2.......





Click here to go to the NEW College Discussion Forum

Discus: College Confidential Café: 2004 Archive: Religion2.......
By Flipflops (Flipflops) on Thursday, May 27, 2004 - 09:37 pm: Edit

Let me have a go at these....

1- If god created the earth, who created god?
* God created time, therefore, there is no beginning or end for him.

2- if Adam and Eve were the first two people, their children would have to procreate with each other.
*How do we know if God created ONLY them? They were the first, but did he create some more?

3- if god was an all powerful being, why couldn't he make the world in 5 days instead of 6, and why did he have to rest on day 7?
*Maybe because he wanted to? Resting is symbolic, and we don't have any proof to say whether it was seven literal days, or seven days spaced between years.

4- why did god wait 4-12 billion years to have his one and only son Jesus?
*Way back when, believers sacrificed animals to redeem sins. To be honest, I don't have a very clear conseption on why this is, I know it could never be enough. Hey, I'm 14, not a scholar, I'm still learning about God too! It's called FAITH

5- light is caused by electrons moving from a higher orbital (energy level) to a lower orbital. Light also comes from massive explosions such as fusion on the Sun of four Hydrogen atoms into a Helium atom, giving off energy with the equation E=MC squared. How did god say "let there be light" "and there was light and it was good"?
*Did it ever occur to you that God isn't imprisoned by our scientific bounderies? Heck, he created them!

6- I am alive, god isn't.
*Ho ho! How do you know that? Honestly, I don't see whow evolution or anything else can be more convincing. I mean, it'd take allot of faith to believe that!

7- how did god explain dinosaur fossils?
*Wha? He created dinosaurs, have you ever heard the story of the great flood? Scientifically, the aftermath of such a flood would be HUGE. hence the ice age. Now that would kill off a few, wouldn't it?

8- why can't the Hubble Telescope find any evidence of god, even though it can find stars 168,000 light years away? A light year is about 5,865,696,000,000 miles, so the distance the Hubble sees is about 985,436,928,000,000,000 miles away.
*God created the stars, he doesn't live in them. Did you ever think that God may not be in a PHYSICALL body? See #5

9- why did god have only one son Jesus?
*That's a good question. Since God is beyond our human capabilities, bounderies, lifestyles, etc, we can't understand everything about perfection. It's a whole other world. No, it isn't a world, it's called heaven. I don't really know how to answer that, but I'll bet some one else could do better.

10- if god created the universe, why did he need someone ELSE to write a book (The Bible) for him?
*He could have if he wanted, but he had a plan. His disciples were recording history. God worked through them that way. They wrote what they had discovered, literally and spiritually. God planned it that way. Hey, he DID write the ten commandments with his own hands.

11- if god wrote the bible, why did god write in third person?
*Call me an idiot, (Or a teenager, that's what I am) I don't quite know what you mean by that. God worked through his disciples, who wrote the Bible. It makes sense that our history was written by our descendants, God connected with us in that way, so we can better understand him. See #10, I can't really explain it very well.

12- why didn't god mention black holes, even though they are proven to exist? A black hole is a massive body which has so much gravity that light cannot escape it. There is one at the center of our galaxy.
*God didn't mention hamburgers either. I think He wanted us to discover things!

13- why didn't god create atoms, which are the building blocks of everything?
*He did create atoms. He created earth, therefore, he created atoms to build it.

14- how did god speak in the vacuum of space? Sound requires a medium, such as air, to travel.
*See #5. God is greater us, that much I know.

OK, I did the best I could. Yeah, people think religion and science have nothing to do with eachother. What are they saying? What's one without the other? If people can take a 'leap of faith' by believing a freak accident created atoms, DNA, black holes, galaxies, etc, well far be it from be to go against them. The fact is, unless we could go back in time, to the beginning of time, we will never be able to fully prove anything as a fact. Whatever we chose to believe, thats what we do, we BELIEVE. We take a leap of faith. What makes them think that they can be sure that there isn't anything or anyone beyond our capabilities to see? Hey, we didn't believe there was other galaxies once apon a time. That was just impossible. :)

By Sarasote (Sarasote) on Friday, May 28, 2004 - 03:32 pm: Edit

First, i am an atheist
Second, i have read the bible 2 times, the entire thing. i read it awhile ago so my memory is a little foggy but im pretty shure im accurate around here

1- If god created the earth, who created god?
This is the most common question that almost every atheist asks a religious zealot...and almost no one can answer that lol.

2- if Adam and Eve were the first two people, their children would have to procreate with each other.
*How do we know if God created ONLY them? They were the first, but did he create some more?
In the Bible, it states that God created 2 people, insinuating only 2 people, and that Adam and Eve had 2 children. However, Adam, i forget how he dies, dies after 900 some years, Eve also dies, and Kain kills Abel. Kain is then left alone lol.

3- if god was an all powerful being, why couldn't he make the world in 5 days instead of 6, and why did he have to rest on day 7?
Its insinuated in the Bible as 7 continuous days

4- why did god wait 4-12 billion years to have his one and only son Jesus?
*This is the stupidest part but....according to Biblical passages and other old/ancient documents, God created Earth/universe in 4000 BC, meaning, basically, dinosaurs and all that other •••• never existed.

5- light is caused by electrons moving from a higher orbital (energy level) to a lower orbital. Light also comes from massive explosions such as fusion on the Sun of four Hydrogen atoms into a Helium atom, giving off energy with the equation E=MC squared. How did god say "let there be light" "and there was light and it was good"?
*just like everything else in science, science basically refutes religion. especially at my school and other people i know, the more intelligent/scientific you are, the less religious you are


6- I am alive, god isn't.
*god is spose to be a spirit or element. he isn't "alive" as the bible claims

7- how did god explain dinosaur fossils?
*as i said before, the bible and other things such as the dead sea scrolls, and other ancient documents claim that god created earth around 4000 BC. Noah's Ark occurred "supposedly" around 2000 BC, meaning dinosaurs was probably wiped out between 4000-2000 BC which is illogical

8- why can't the Hubble Telescope find any evidence of god, even though it can find stars 168,000 light years away? A light year is about 5,865,696,000,000 miles, so the distance the Hubble sees is about 985,436,928,000,000,000 miles away.
*haha good question

9- why did god have only one son Jesus?
*the bible is not the only document created by the disciples. and in most documents, it states that Jesus never claimed that he was the son of god. however, most of these documents were later destroyed in the Great Library since they were stored in Alexandria

10- if god created the universe, why did he need someone ELSE to write a book (The Bible) for him?
*cuz his illiterate

11- if god wrote the bible, why did god write in third person?
*well, im not religious but perhaps god is like the queen of england who refers to herself as "we"

12- why didn't god mention black holes, even though they are proven to exist? A black hole is a massive body which has so much gravity that light cannot escape it. There is one at the center of our galaxy.
*umm thats a stupid question

13- why didn't god create atoms, which are the building blocks of everything?
*well im assuming he did lol

14- how did god speak in the vacuum of space? Sound requires a medium, such as air, to travel.
*god is telepathic haha

there are many flaws/contradictions in the bible. the bible condemns men having long hair (oh jesus is depicted with long hair). the bible also states that consuming shellfish and other animals/life from the sea is acts of the devil (and the story about jesus showing people how to fish?).

Stories such as Noah's Ark and other biblical stories have also been refuted with more discoveries. During 2000-1000 BC, the Caspian Sea flooded. THis is where Noah lived. The Caspian Sea flooded for years and as a result this is Noah's interpretation of "the Great Flood".

Also, everyone who has taken biology knows that there have been scientific experiments, using early Earth conditions, to create single-celled organisms.

Religion is the biggest waste of time and must churches are cults. i truly believe that the more schooling and the more educated you become, the less religious you are (explaining why we are much less religious than people in the past). Religion causes so many horrible things to happen, so why keep it?

I dont understand how people can tell others that their religion is the only one that is correct. Christianity itself is so flawed and split (so many denominations that believe in different things) that how do u know what is correct?

thats my take on religion

By Muslimah_Angel (Muslimah_Angel) on Friday, May 28, 2004 - 03:49 pm: Edit

why does everyone only refer to the bible when debating the existence of god???? there are other widespread texts of religion/monotheism..just a thought guys....not all believers in god are christian or read the bible

By Sarasote (Sarasote) on Friday, May 28, 2004 - 03:55 pm: Edit

because christianity is the most widespread, well-known religion that "attempts" to confirm the existence of God.

By Bumblebee83 (Bumblebee83) on Friday, May 28, 2004 - 05:09 pm: Edit

Thank you Muslimah!! I'm an aetheist, so obviously I don't really care what religion we're talking about, but christians (not all, so don't go getting all mad at me) make me feel like because I don't think what they believe, I'm stupid or something...Especially when they get going about Muslims or Jews like they must be right and other religions that are similar to them must be wrong...
Also, I believe (and maybe someone who's Jewish could confirm this for me) god supposedly created Adam and Lilith but Adam didn't like Lilith so he made god create someone that would submit to his wishes.
And as to the comment that Adam and Eve would have had to procreate with each other...in other species this happens all the time...the children will not usually be deformed or anything, but Breeding amongst sibilings greatly increases the likelihood that you will spread rare genetic diseases unto your children, since if bro has the marker and so does sis.....

By Muslimah_Angel (Muslimah_Angel) on Friday, May 28, 2004 - 05:16 pm: Edit

Sarasote, how can you say that christianity is "the most widespread, well-known religion that 'attempts' to confirm the existence of God"? It isn't. Judaism and Islam also qualify under that heading; Judaism uses more than just the Bible to support its arguments, Islam doesn't use the Bible at all.

By Sarasote (Sarasote) on Friday, May 28, 2004 - 05:22 pm: Edit

we all know that christianity is the largest religion in the world, also the national religion of our country. not many people on this board or in the US at all know much about Islam and when most people debate religion and what not, they debate christianity cuz it is the most well-known. christianity originated from judaism and many of the concepts/beliefs are similar, though there are some differences. however, judaism is less than 5% of the world population. clearly in this discussion, and the previous one, we are debating christianity. i personally know nothing about Islam, and i know much more about christianity. since this discussion has turned into the truths/flaws of christianity that is what i am talking about.

By Sarasote (Sarasote) on Friday, May 28, 2004 - 05:25 pm: Edit

"why does everyone only refer to the bible when debating the existence of god???? there are other widespread texts of religion/monotheism..just a thought guys....not all believers in god are christian or read the bible "

this topic began as a debate about the bible

By Flipflops (Flipflops) on Friday, May 28, 2004 - 05:59 pm: Edit

AAAHHHH!! I just realized something!! I made a mistake. I wrote the title as religion. %-)
Christianity is not a religion. It's a relationship. Religions are based on DOING things...Earning your right to heaven, paying for your sins, saying Hail Mary's, etc. Thus, the deeds of many, in the past and present.
Honestly, how, as imperfect as we all are, do we think we can possibly get into heaven by anything we can do? As a Christian, I don't believe in that. There is a price, but is has been paid.
Ah, but you don't even think there is a heaven. I'm getting carried away.
Aaaaaaaaaahuuuuummmmm...I am phsycic. I see you now......snorting.....A smirk on your face.....Lol. I don't care. :)

Oh, I must say, of course, if you believe in something, (or don't) of course you think its the only way.
So then you yourself think that you are right and everyone else is wrong. You can't really say you don't think people should impose their morals on others, you just did it yourself.

By Flipflops (Flipflops) on Friday, May 28, 2004 - 06:20 pm: Edit

Oh, yeah I forgot to mention that these are not my questions or anything, someone else asked them.
Ah, to question #2, I quess I had the wrong answer. I'm not going to sit here and tell you I know everything there is to know about the bible.
Honestly, I hope someone, ah, older....experienced I mean, will have the know-how to answer that.

By Poison_Ivy (Poison_Ivy) on Friday, May 28, 2004 - 06:29 pm: Edit

1- If God created the earth, who created God? *No one can answer this. One point for you.


2- If Adam and Eve were the first two people, their children would have to procreate with each other. *This happens everywhere in the Bible. Abramham was Sarah's half brother. Rachel married her cousin, Jacob.

*How do we know if God created ONLY them? They were the first, but did he create some more?
They lived for about 800-900 years. *Do you think that they really would be sex free?

3- If God is an all powerful being, why couldn't he make the world in 5 days instead of 6, and why did he have to rest on day 7? *Because he wanted to.

4- Why did God wait 4-12 billion years to have his one and only son Jesus? *First of all, the world is lot younger than that. More like 10,000 years if you do the math. Carbon dating has been questioned for its accurary. Plus, Jesus (Michael) was part of God, as in the Trinity. He didn't have Him, he was part of Him.

5- Light is caused by electrons moving from a higher orbital (energy level) to a lower orbital. Light also comes from massive explosions such as fusion on the sun of four hydrogen atoms into a helium atom, giving off energy with the equation E=MC squared. How did God say "let there be light" "and there was light and it was good"? *I honestly failed science, so put this into technical terms.

6- I am alive, God isn't. *How do you know?

7- How did God explain dinosaur fossils? *The Bible doesn't explain many things such as all the types of species.

8- Why can't the Hubble Telescope find any evidence of God, even though it can find stars 168,000 light years away? A light year is about 5,865,696,000,000 miles, so the distance the Hubble sees is about 985,436,928,000,000,000 miles away. *God could be invisible. The Hubble can't locate black holes.

9- Why did God have only one son Jesus?
*Refer to answer 4.

10- If God created the universe, why did he need someone ELSE to write a book (The Bible) for him? He didn't write it, he gave inspiration for the people to read it.

11- If God wrote the bible, why did god write in third person? *Refer to answer 10.

12- Why didn't God mention black holes, even though they are proven to exist? A black hole is a massive body which has so much gravity that light cannot escape it. There is one at the center of our galaxy.
*Refer to answer 7.

13- Why didn't God create atoms, which are the building blocks of everything?
*Think of it like this, I bake a cake, but I didn't need to grind the flour etc. He used his natural resources.

14- How did God speak in the vacuum of space? Sound requires a medium, such as air, to travel.
*He is all powerful.

Science should be considered a religion. There are many evidence remaining today. Like scientists had found evidence that a snake used to have legs, but remember, God put a curse to the snakes. And chances are the Caspian flood was the Great Flood, just not that name. And if Anaractia melted, there would be a world wide flood. And two last things. Athesists are very repetive and you can never understand the Bible without God's faith. I'm a Seventh Day Adventist. I hope that oneday, the truth will be seen despite of your blinded eyes. I will pray for you....

By Eyesclozedtight (Eyesclozedtight) on Friday, May 28, 2004 - 07:03 pm: Edit

i don't understand something. why do christians discredit darwinism because even he himself may have made mistakes, or like stated above, carbon dating may not be totally accurate? i still think there is more evidence supporting evolution than not. with that said, why do religious people feel that their blind faith is a more valid than something backed up by physical proof?

By Flipflops (Flipflops) on Friday, May 28, 2004 - 08:45 pm: Edit

The bible IS backed by physical proof. I don't know where to start.
You just haven't looked. Most public schools don't even like to consider the idea of something besides Darwinism, the Big Bang, etc.
The truth is, allot of material in text books have been disproven, but are still taught.
I encourage you to look up science books that support creation. We're not as blind as you may think

By Flipflops (Flipflops) on Friday, May 28, 2004 - 08:52 pm: Edit

Veeeerrry interesting Poisonivy, you know more than I do.
I just want to say,
THE MORE I LEARN ABOUT SCIENCE, THE MORE I'M CONVINCED, IT COULD'NT POSSIBLY BE AN ACCIDENT.
Even the simplest life form, which isn't that simple, convinces me that a freak mixing of chemicals, (Where did they come from anyway?) couldn't create a living orgamism. Really, which is the bigger leap of faith?

By Phantom (Phantom) on Friday, May 28, 2004 - 10:52 pm: Edit

Let me try responding to some of these too; it'll help me sort out my own convoluted thoughts on the topic of religion. I feel that some of the questions are plain stupid and pointless though, and I will skip over those (atoms, black hole, speaking in space).

A bit about myself first: I do believe in a God, a higher being. I had been told that my beliefs correspond most to those of a Deist, and after looking them up, I am inclined to agree. Deism is more of a philosophy than a religion.

*If god created the earth, who created god?
*God has always existed. How did the Big Bang start?

*If god was an all powerful being, why couldn't he make the world in 5 days instead of 6, and why did he have to rest on day 7?
*Pointless question. If the Bible had said it took him one day, I bet you'd ask: "Why couldn't God create the world in an hour?" I also don't believe it says he HAD to rest of the seventh day; he just chose to. Again, however, I do not follow the Bible.

*Light is caused by electrons moving from a higher orbital (energy level) to a lower orbital. Light also comes from massive explosions such as fusion on the Sun of four Hydrogen atoms into a Helium atom, giving off energy with the equation E=MC squared. How did god say "let there be light" "and there was light and it was good"?
*As a Deist, I believe that God created the universe with the Big Bang, with a set of natural laws and stepped back, allowing it to grow for itself.

*I am alive, god isn't.
*Huh? Why do you assume God's dead?

*If god created the universe, why did he need someone ELSE to write a book (The Bible) for him?
*I don't believe God has interfered with our universe since he created it.
----------------------
More about Deism (taken from http://www.religioustolerance.org/deism.htm):

-Deists believe that God created the universe, "wound it up" and then disassociated himself from his creation.

-A few Deists believe that God still intervenes in human affairs from time to time.

-They do not view God as an entity in human form.

-They believe that one cannot access God through any organized religion, set of beliefs, rituals, sacraments or other practice.

-God has not selected a chosen people (e.g. Jews or Christians) to be the recipients of any special revelation or gifts.

-They often view Jesus as a philosopher, rabbi, teacher and healer, but not as the Son of God.

-A practical morality can be derived from reason without the need to appeal to religious revelation and church dogma. Most Deists believe humans are too innately noble to require supernatural coercion and threats of eternal damnation to behave morally.

-Deists pray, but only to express their appreciation to God for his works. They generally do not ask for special privileges, or try to assess the will of God through prayer or ask God to perform miracles.

After AP Bio this year, I feel more strongly than ever that there is a God. Everything seems too perfect and too interwoven to be a coincidence. You could argue probability with me, that there are billions or trillions of planets out there and that everything came together by sheer coincidence, but I don't believe that. I also feel that faith is a good thing. Religion usually brings out the best in everyone (not all religious organizations are cults or composed of zealots).

Just out of curiosity, for all you atheists, why and how did you decide that there is no God?

By Conker (Conker) on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 12:30 am: Edit

In response to Muslimah...

Christianity encompasses most of the tenets of Judaism, and thus the two are one (referred to as Judeo-Christianity).

Atheists usually don't argue against Islam or the Qu'ran because of the elitist attitude of many Muslims. They insist that the only TRUE Qu'ran is in Arabic and will actually use this as an argument. Thus, there is no way to hold any rational discourse with these Muslims. And from a personal standpoint, I find the Qu'ran more morally repugnant than the Bible.

By New_Generation (New_Generation) on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 12:37 am: Edit

This is what I believe.
http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0001/0001_01.
Look at some others while your there!

By New_Generation (New_Generation) on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 12:48 am: Edit

The Qu'ran teaches that if you put an end to yourself and others you will be in paradise, and to hate "infidels".
Jesus says to you LOVE one another even your enemies as you love your self, but you have to believe that Jesus is the Son of God to get to heaven; "None come to the Father but by Me."

By Bumblebee83 (Bumblebee83) on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 12:50 am: Edit

My decision started out that I hate organized religions. I never went to any churches other than Christian, so my thinking came a lot from that. I used to go to a youth group every week, which started out fun and stuff but then they started telling me that I needed to burn all of my cds that were secular...And then I became very aware of the fact that Christianity hates women. If you want to fight with me about that, you can try but women are supposed to submit to their husbands, and I don't submit... And then I took a bunch of sciences classes and such, and god doesn't make any sense to me. Evolution does, though.
I should also mention tht my parents were/are hippies and as such they didn't force any of their beliefs on my bro and I. We were expected to think for ourselves... The only semi-religion I can stand by at all is deism.
And now I need to do some arguing....
"The bible IS backed by physical proof. I don't know where to start.
You just haven't looked. Most public schools don't even like to consider the idea of something besides Darwinism, the Big Bang, etc.
The truth is, allot of material in text books have been disproven, but are still taught.
I encourage you to look up science books that support creation. We're not as blind as you may think "
Please how me proof, Id like to see it.
"Why did God wait 4-12 billion years to have his one and only son Jesus? *First of all, the world is lot younger than that. More like 10,000 years if you do the math. Carbon dating has been questioned for its accurary. Plus, Jesus (Michael) was part of God, as in the Trinity. He didn't have Him, he was part of Him. "
What math are you talking about 'cause I think you missed a bunch of zeros. Carbon dating isn't how they know how old the universe is, physics is. And Hubble can't "see" black holes, but it can detect it. And there's other satelites that see xrays that can literally see black holes. The fact that hubble can 12 billion light years away means that its looking 12 billion years into the past. So if we can see that far back then there has to be something to see

By Bumblebee83 (Bumblebee83) on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 12:52 am: Edit

Oh and Conker, um who's being the elitist here?

By Jajas2 (Jajas2) on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 01:03 am: Edit

Im reading this very interesting book at this point, "Isaac Asimovs Guide to the Bible". Its a really, really interesting and enlightening book about just how the history and legends of the Hebrew peoples shaped the bible.

Most of the legends and stories in the bible were written long after the fact, and have been embellished and confronted by being passed down orally over the years. He goes over the bible, verse by verse, using reams of available historical data to show that the old testament was created over thousands of years, but written down only during a few periods. During the exodus, for instance, the Torah was congealed together by Hebrew hoping to maintain their unique heritage, and their writings reflect this. But they also got a lot of things mixed up and much of their legends are actually babylonian, eg, the creation.

Any rational person can see that the bible cannot be taken as literal fact. There are inconsistencies that wary widely from book to book, and there is much that is lost in translation. Also, modern, as well as ancient, science repudiates a lot of tales that occur in the bible. Its a matter of faith though. If you beleive it, well then good on ya. But you can't beleive that the bible is literal and definative.

P.s. Its the cheap way out that when any tricky quandries are brought up to say "God wanted it that way". Well then I say God wants you to gimme 20 bucks.

By Jajas2 (Jajas2) on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 01:09 am: Edit

Oh, and to those who find the q'ran "morally repugnant"... Have you read the bible? I have, the q'ran too, cover to cover. They are both morally repugnant, but the bible is hypocritical. How can jesus be the warrior and the prince of peace? The same book says an eye for an eye AND to turn the other cheek. If this is the holw word of god then christianity must me polytheism. Or god has multiple personality disorder. And possibly ADD.

By New_Generation (New_Generation) on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 01:12 am: Edit

"And Hubble can't "see" black holes, but it can detect it. And there's other satelites that see xrays that can literally see black holes. The fact that hubble can 12 billion light years away means that its looking 12 billion years into the past. So if we can see that far back then there has to be something to see."

Well, do you mean that space is getting bigger and bigger? If God can do anything, as the Bible says, can't He just say "Let there be light" and it be everywhere at once?
Christians DON'T hate women. Please don't get me wrong, I am VERY strong in mind and spirit (I'm so modest, sorry! lol) Women are equal, but we where meant to be different.
You and I are different, right? Different hair, different likes and dislikes, different beliefs. But God loves you just as much as He loves me.
God has no favorites, He said not to.

By New_Generation (New_Generation) on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 01:32 am: Edit

"Oh, and to those who find the q'ran "morally repugnant"... Have you read the bible? I have, the q'ran too, cover to cover. They are both morally repugnant, but the bible is hypocritical. How can jesus be the warrior and the prince of peace? The same book says an eye for an eye AND to turn the other cheek."

Um, sorry, but I don't think you read the verses before that. The Bible says in verse 38-39 of chapter 5 in the book of Matthew, "You heard that it was said, 'eye for an eye, and tooth for a tooth.'
But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also."

You don't seem to understand about the rapture. I suggest you read Revelation.
He is giving everybody 2nd chances, FREE. But it cost Him a terrible price. If people donít accept His gift, it's there fault.
He will come and take people that believe in Him and His Son and what He did for them away and that will be that.

Oh, and please type Jesus with a capital letter, even if you donít believe, it is still a name.

Um, Jajas2?
Asimov believes in evolution, right? Well, how many times has evolution theories been disproved? And that is about the past.
The Bible says what happened, as well as what will be. So far, it has been true.

By New_Generation (New_Generation) on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 01:41 am: Edit

By Flipflops (Flipflops) on Friday, May 28, 2004 - 05:59 pm


"AAAHHHH!! I just realized something!! I made a mistake. I wrote the title as religion. %-)
Christianity is not a religion. It's a relationship. Religions are based on DOING things..."

Your right, but it is also the truth.

Good night all! :)

By Jajas2 (Jajas2) on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 02:23 am: Edit

Um new generation. You beleive in the bible right? How many times has that been disproved?

Evolution has most definately not beed disproved. Parts of it may be revised, as it is science, not "the word of god", but as a whole it is stronger than ever. Please know what your talking about before you make wild, nonsensical statements.

By Jajas2 (Jajas2) on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 02:25 am: Edit

And by the way, there are many people in the bible named jesus.. aka joshua... aka jehesua

By Nmoreno1 (Nmoreno1) on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 03:02 am: Edit

Just to clear this point right now, in case it comes up later. Darwin did not believe that humans descended from apes; actually, he believed they SHARED A COMMON ANCESTOR (since, of course, there are still apes today.)

By Bumblebee83 (Bumblebee83) on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 03:03 am: Edit

Ok, if Christianity is so big on women, tell me why the church cut Lilith out?
But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God." (I Corinthians 11:3)

"For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man." (I Corinthians 11:8-9)

Let the women learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression." (I Timothy 2:11-14)
Have you ever even read the bible? Ive got tons more if you want them. You can't just take the good parts that you like and throw out what you don't. Christians as individuals may not hate women but the bible does
And yes actually space is expanding, Mr. Hubble proved that thanks, and they just found a while ago that not only is the universe expanding but it's also accelerating, thanks for proving that point for me.

By Eyesclozedtight (Eyesclozedtight) on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 03:24 am: Edit

that's a good point bumblebee!

you can take anything from the bible out of context and make it say whatever you wished it to support. for example, abortion. i could pull 5 quotes right now that would make it seem like the bible supported abortion. on the other hand you could make the case for the opposite too. the bible is so full of incongruities, that i'm not exactly sure what i'm *supposed* to believe. how does anyone else?

By New_Generation (New_Generation) on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 09:13 am: Edit

What does the Bible say about the role of a woman?


I Corinthians 14:34 says, "Let your women keep silent in the churches..."; the footnotes from the Spirit-Filled Life Bible says:
"...Paul is not forbidding women to manifest spiritual gifts in the service (see Acts 2:18; 21:9). Rather, he prohibits undisciplined discussion that would disturb the service. Also possible is the forbidden speaking along the lines of I Timothy 2:11-15, which precludes women from becoming independent doctrinal (apostolic) authorities over men...Perhaps more helpful is noting that the Greek word here for "woman" is also translatable "wife." Thus, the command may confront the impropriety in any age for a wife to domineeringly issue doctrinal commands and enforce authoritative teachings, embarrassing her husband in public. The Bible does not assign rigid social or church roles of men and women, but it does place headship and authority in husbands as an abiding principle for this age."

Again this issue is addressed in I Timothy 2:11-12 it says, "Let a woman learn in silence...do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence..." The notes from the Spirit-Filled Life Bible says:

"Positively, Paul exhorts women to be disciples and to maintain a conduct that would not discredit the church. The prohibition of v. 12 refers to the authoritative office of apostolic teacher in the church. It does not forbid women to educate, proclaim truth or exhort (prophesy). See Acts 2:17; 18:26; 21:9; I Cor. 11:5; Phil. 4:3; II Tim. 1:5; 3:14, 15; Titus 2:3-5."

By New_Generation (New_Generation) on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 09:21 am: Edit

By Jajas2 (Jajas2) on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 02:23 am: Edit


"Um new generation. You beleive in the bible right? How many times has that been disproved?

Evolution has most definately not beed disproved. Parts of it may be revised, as it is science, not "the word of god", but as a whole it is stronger than ever. Please know what your talking about before you make wild, nonsensical statements."

I am sorry; please forgive me, but what has been disproved? I want to do some research. :) Thanks
Oh, um, there is more than one Jesus in the Bible? Please tell me where, I want to know the truth of what it really says.

~

By Eyesclozedtight (Eyesclozedtight) on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 03:24 am: Edit


that's a good point bumblebee!

"you can take anything from the bible out of context and make it say whatever you wished it to support. for example, abortion. i could pull 5 quotes right now that would make it seem like the bible supported abortion. on the other hand you could make the case for the opposite too. the bible is so full of incongruities, that Iím not exactly sure what i'm *supposed* to believe. how does anyone else?"

Please tell me some, I want to understand...Thanks!
~
"Oh, and to those who find the q'ran "morally repugnant"... Have you read the bible? I have, the q'ran too, cover to cover. They are both morally repugnant, but the bible is hypocritical. How can jesus be the warrior and the prince of peace? The same book says an eye for an eye AND to turn the other cheek."

Um, sorry, but I don't think you read the verses before that. The Bible says in verse 38-39 of chapter 5 in the book of Matthew, "You heard that it was said, 'eye for an eye, and tooth for a tooth.'
But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also."

By New_Generation (New_Generation) on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 11:16 am: Edit

I was reading another post...
"There's one more thing about the idea of an omnipotent god that bothers me. Why would god not want to end all the suffering in this world? There are two possible answers:
1. God doesn't exist
2. God is an _________
Either way, it kind of invalidates religion."

I think He wants to so badly. He loves you. But. If God "ended all suffering" He would not be giving us a second chance, and if He did not give us a second chance, we would be in constant, never-ending pain and at the place where there is weeping a gnashing of teeth when we die. But if we believe, then we can go to the place that has many mansions, just for you, and there is no weeping, and no pain.

By Beero1000 (Beero1000) on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 01:21 pm: Edit

uhh ^^ that sounds a lot like
if god ended all suffering then there would be constant never-ending suffering

By Jenesaispas (Jenesaispas) on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 02:28 pm: Edit

God cannot end suffering because that would negate the existence of free will. If God was going to end suffering, why would there have been suffering to begin with?

But people have to grow up and stop the suffering of their own volition--that is, of course, witht he help of God. :)

By Sarasote (Sarasote) on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 02:34 pm: Edit

First of all i would like to ask, where is there evidence of God? My question is how can people believe so firmly that there is a God when all that ever seems to happen in our lifetime and on Earth are disasters. Where is God, just watching us kill ourselves? pollute our planet? destroy wildlife? basically ruin everything he created? Why does God sit there and watch us destroy everything he created?

"Um new generation. You beleive in the bible right? How many times has that been disproved?

I am sorry; please forgive me, but what has been disproved? I want to do some research."

how has the bible been disproven? how has it been proven? there is no evidence on earth that accounts for anything in the bible. The bible should be proof enough that it is a book of bogus/false words. Each section of the bible was written at different times. the last section was written and added to the bible 150 years after the death of Jesus. How accurate is this, stating what Jesus "said" or what God "said" 150 years earlier?

Also, why would the Bible condemn homosexuality? Didnt God create everything? If he created homosexuals, why does he condemn them?

If God is all powerful and created everything, why did he create Satan? wouldn't he be able to get rid of him since Satan was a fallen angel?

And yes, all you Christians don't deny it, the bible does promote sexism. Throughout the Bible, it talks of how women are inferior, how women should bow to men. I mean, Eve was created from Adam? isnt that proof enough. If you are a Christian-girl you are advocating sexism against yourself.

Also, there is no one here who ABSOLUTELY BELIEVES AND FOLLOWS EVERYTHING THE BIBLE SAYS. its just impossible. if you think you have then im laughing at you. Have you ever eaten seafood? DO you have hair past the nape of your neck? You've never been gluttonous, greedy? It is impossible to follow the bible 100%, so why follow it at all?

If you have read the entire bible, you should know that it tells you to pray silently "with the door closed". you should not pray openly/with others. this refutes prayer in school, and why do christians want prayer in school? i have never met a christian who actually follows the bible. who goes to church every sunday, the bible says you should.

the bible also claims that the earth WAS CREATED IN 4000 BC! 6000 years ago. i dont know why some of you christians are talking about 12000 years ago or watever because the bible says, earth was created "4000 years prior to jesus' birth".

also, carbon dating is proven to be 100% effective, unless its too old. carbon dating only works up to a certain timeframe. if you have taken biology or chemistry you should know about half-life and what not. beyond carbon dating its using uranium. whether you want to accept it or not, carbon dating is 100% effective in the timeframe it can test.

lastly...evolution has NEVER been disproved. i dont know what you are thinking. and how does biology make u feel closer to God? biology disproves religion. Evolution completely refutes god's "making man". The Columbia professor's experiment in the lab does as well. so does parthenogensis, nasonia wasps. Homologous structures, Comparative embryology. how does this support the bible?

....lastly....the earliest man was in southern Africa....so adam and eve are black rite? lol

By Bumblebee83 (Bumblebee83) on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 02:44 pm: Edit

New generation.....READ WHAT YOU WROTE!!! Why do I have to be silent in church? because I'm a women. I can teach, but I can't teach men because they are superior to me.
"Thus, the command may confront the impropriety in any age for a wife to domineeringly issue doctrinal commands and enforce authoritative teachings, embarrassing her husband in public. The Bible does not assign rigid social or church roles of men and women, but it does place headship and authority in husbands as an abiding principle for this age."
Headship and authority means that MEN RULE WOMEN. I'm sorry but any relgion that tells me that men are to rule me without question just like god rules men is sexist. big time. god is supposedly allpowerful and allknowing and infallible right? so by giving men comparituve power of women like that of god over men means that women are morally weak and unintelligent by nature. That my friend is the bible hating women
And I took nothing out of context, I put the direct quote from the bible into my post...how is that out of context?

By Jenesaispas (Jenesaispas) on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 03:00 pm: Edit

Am I the only one to acknowledge that the Bible should NOT be interpreted literally? I mean, come on now. Why would a divinely inspired book be literal in meaning? That just doesn't add up. This would mean that the meanings of the Bible stem from within, not without. Therefore, any sweeping generalizations about the Bible should most likely prove false, as the Bible, in addition to other books like the Quran, etc., should only be interpreted by the individual. One of my problems with Christianity is the degree to which pastors, ministers, priests, etc. interpret the Bible for a person. It just doesn't work that way, I don't think. It may have been good when no one was able to read, but now, it's kinda outdated.

And science does not exist without religion, nor does religion, in reality, exist without science. I don't see how a person can blatantly separate the two.

And the Bible doesn't condemn homosexuals. It condemns acts of homosexuality. There's a BIG difference.

Clearly men and women are equal as humans. There is no doubt, unless one is blinded by ignorance. I tend to attribute spirtual meaning to the story and Adam and Eve, in addition to the plethora of other stories.

Oh yeah, and to those who cannot equate suffering with the existence of God: When's the last time YOU'VE helped anyone in true need? And I'm not talking about the charity of a conflicted conscience or other transient causes... (quoting Thoreau, "There is no odor so bad as that which arises from goodness
tainted.")
Does the fact that you--addressed only to some--don't perform charity mean you don't exist? Well, in a sense, I suppose it does.

By Goodchocolate (Goodchocolate) on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 03:07 pm: Edit

Religion and science are COMPLETE opposites!

By Jenesaispas (Jenesaispas) on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 03:26 pm: Edit

That is quite the generalization, especially to say that they are "COMPLETE" opposites. I can think of at least one instance that disproves the statement.

And you purport its truth, eh? Well, isn't a fundamental "tenet" of science is the existence of reason? Shouldn't you always be open to new ideas rather than clinging, dogmatically, to ideas which you were probably made to believe?

By Sarasote (Sarasote) on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 04:02 pm: Edit

science would exist perfectly fine without religion, since science did arise before monotheistic religions came to be and beliefs of Christianity arose. Greek philosophers/ancient scientists discovered many scientific discoveries without religion intact. and yes science is reason; however, religion is not. u cant believe firmly in science and be very religions at the same time, they contradict one another. it is impossible. name one thing in science that needs/uses from religion.
***nothing in science relates to religion. as more scientific discoveries have been discovered, religion has become less important in everyday life. if you did not know, less and less people are going to church/staying relgious every year. the increasing number of intellectuals and scientists will be the death of religion***

"Clearly men and women are equal as humans. There is no doubt, unless one is blinded by ignorance. I tend to attribute spirtual meaning to the story and Adam and Eve, in addition to the plethora of other stories. "
**clearly they are not. Eve eats the apple. it is Eve's fault there is evil in this world. it is Eve's fault that mankind was banished from paradise. Eve sprouted from Adam. Eve is dependent on Adam. Everything stated in the bible clearly indicates that women are inferior to men.

Am I the only one to acknowledge that the Bible should NOT be interpreted literally?
**that is the problem. everyone interprets the Bible differently. i dont believe that there are 2 Christians out there who believe absolutely the same thing. doesnt this just prove that the Bible is vague and not definite? how can you "achieve salvation and reach Heaven?" everyone has different interpretations and thats the problem. The bible clearly states what is required to reach Heaven. all these different interpreations makes nothing in the Bible remain "believeable". if the Bible is open to interpretation, why go to church? u are just listening to a priests' interpretation of it. why read the bible? why follow it? u basicaly are creating ur own denomination/form of Christianity. These "different interpretations" have caused more wars/deaths in this world than anything else. religion is the most controversial subject ever since the past and i think religion is the root of evil.

though the bible does say some good morals such as the 10 commandments, those are basically common sense and something everyone knows. i grew up without even know what the 10 commandments were and i have grown up practicing some of them such as "honour thy father and thy mother, thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal".

but arent these words of God contradictory? in history, so many people ahve "killed in the name of God" and what not.

and condemning homosexuality is the same thing. whether or not it is saying it is wrong and why would the Bible condemn it when God himself created it?

By Goodchocolate (Goodchocolate) on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 04:37 pm: Edit

Sarasote, despite your inability to type a coherent sentence -- well said!!

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That is quite the generalization, especially to say that they are "COMPLETE" opposites. I can think of at least one instance that disproves the statement.

And you purport its truth, eh? Well, isn't a fundamental "tenet" of science is the existence of reason? Shouldn't you always be open to new ideas rather than clinging, dogmatically, to ideas which you were probably made to believe?


They ARE complete opposites. How about giving me an example of how they're NOT? (Since you believe in that so firmly.)

By Sarasote (Sarasote) on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 04:42 pm: Edit

lol sorry im doing lotsa other things and i went back to change parts of sentences and it ended up all messed up. oh well i dont care :-D

By Jenesaispas (Jenesaispas) on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 06:13 pm: Edit

"u cant believe firmly in science and be very religions at the same time, they contradict one another."

Oh, and I'm sure science has never contradicted itself... EVER! Hm, well, I distinctly recall Plato proving the immobility of the earth and the movement of the sun... but then, by similar LOGIC, he could prove the earth moved around the immobile sun. Hmm... and then we have Ptolemy who agreed with Plato's first hypothesis, in theory, but introduced epicycles. And then Kepler and Galileo started to murmur otherwise, by reason, again, of course. So, it can be concluded that, in now way, is reason and logic perfect. If it were, all the philosophers of the past SHOULD be united in their thoughts. But anyways, reason moves along a constant progression, as more and more knowledge is available on a daily basis; the same is true for religion. Religion is by no means perfect--in fact, it's far from it.

And to say religion is becoming less important everyday is crazy! When do we need a more unifying force than today? I'm not saying that religion is perfect, but it certainly has the potential to do a whole lotta good for us.

"u basicaly are creating ur own denomination/form of Christianity. These "different interpretations" have caused more wars/deaths in this world than anything else. religion is the most controversial subject ever since the past and i think religion is the root of evil."

Hm, I don't ever stating explicitly that I was a Christian or that I attended any church to listen to a babbling priest who thinks he knows what's going on in the world. These "different interpetations," and I quote myself, do not coexist in the spirit of the Bible or Christ/other religions. If everyone interpreted a Holy Book PERSONALLY, and did not turn into a preaching demagogue, the earth'd be just fine. If you take to heart the teachings of Christ and other prophets, i.e., be kind to others, live a life of humility/kindness, etc., then you are a true Christian. But what a sorry state the world is currently in... "Many are called, but few are chosen." How true this is...

"the increasing number of intellectuals and scientists will be the death of religion"

Hm, that's rather funny when you think about it. Let's take a look at the past and the great thinkers.
"After religious teachers accomplish the refining process indicated, they will surely recognize with joy that true religion has been ennobled and made more profound by scientific knowledge." Albert Einstein
Interesting...
Plus, many astronmers and physicists' passion for advacement in science was fueled by religion. They all wanted to uncover the mysteries of God's world. Newton was a unitarian, I think, while Kepler was a Protestant. And, also, we have classical composers like Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Chopin... they were all devoutly religious! Emerson, Thoreau... they, too, believed in God and religion, yet they saw the apparent problems with organized religion that demand reform. Yes, and these people seem rather competent, do they not?

Oh, and remember when Europe was in the Dark Ages? Well, it turns out that the burgeoning Islamic civilization was flourishing in advacement, both social and scientific. I don't know, but there seems to be some inconsistencies with your logic. Is it that you are wrong or that the aforementioned are not intellectuals--a claim, pardon the pun, blasphemous to all of science.

"religion is the root of evil"

Hm, well, I only recall men creating evil and masking their actions with religion. This is not representative of religion's potential, just of man's imperfections.

And I don't recall God ever telling man to kill other people... unless I am mistaken, in which case, please, inform me otherwise.

I think it's completely wrong to ostracize homosexuals. It's immoral and takes from them their natural rights. However, I view homosexuality as something to be overcome, just as other physical disabilities. I realize some people may have genetic predispositions that incline them to homosexuality, but--and I don't want to sound like a flaming conservative, becuase I most certainly am not--I still thing there is a cure, with God's help.

GoodChocolate, when you say, "Religion and science are complete opposites," do you refer exclusively to the Bible? As previously stated, the Bible isn't perfect in the sense that it isn't supposed to be a historical/science textbook. It, and the books of other religions, has the specific duty of imparting spirtiaul guidance and wisdom, NOT scientific knowledge. Any argument otherwise seems a little contradictory.

With all of this said, I hope I do not come off sounding condescending because we're all people here, arguing complex ideas. I love you all! :) :)

By Henfour (Henfour) on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 08:45 pm: Edit

Jenesaispas: although I am an athiest, I think you presented a good argument. I also think modern science probably evolved with or from religion. As science became more complex, "good religion" adapted to accommodate it. Religion, after all, attempts to explain the creation of the universe. The question of the creation of the universe still bothers scientists today, and even modern science has some major contradictions. For example:

First, if the universe started with the big bang, how did all the energy and mass get there?
Second, if the universe is expanding faster and faster, what force causes this acceleration?
Third, what happens to time at the center of a black hole?
Fourth, what happens to time at absolute zero?
Fifth, how big is the universe?
Sixth, why is the speed of light approximately 300,000,000 meters per second instead of 400,000,000 meters per second?

I could think of more but I have to work on an english project.

By Henfour (Henfour) on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 10:45 pm: Edit

"religion is the root of evil"

I can think of many examples to prove this statement true.

1) the Holocaust
2) suicide bombings
3) ethnic clensing in Kosovo
4) the war in Iraq (hate Bush)
5) September 11, 2001
6) abusive priests
7) war between Isralies and Arabs

Think of the symbolic importance of the number 7.

By Jenesaispas (Jenesaispas) on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 11:03 pm: Edit

Hmmmm. Alright.
1 and 3) Um, religion was not the cause of evil in this instance. You can't blame that Holocaust victims on their religion... that's really messed up. According to this supposed "proof," if an immoral atheist kills a very devout, um, let's say, Buddhist who has never harmed a fly in his life... and he kills him becuase he's Budhdist, that religion was behind this "evil" act. Only crazy people kill other people... crazy people who possess a deluded sense of reality. This applies to 9/11, suicide bombings, etc.

As for the war in Iraq, I do not believe it is a war over religion... even thought war is a BAD thing.

Abusive priests... well, you can't really say religion facilitated these acts. It's definitely the priests themselves and culture that looked the other way... the same goes for the above examples, too.

The war between Israel and the Arab world... well, it sounds like a lack of education to me, and deeply rooted cultural ties, etc. I find it so sad when there are little kids at the violence rallies. It makes me want to cry! They don't know what they're being taught.

I don't really see how religion was the "root" of all this evil... it seems to me that int he few cases that may be "caused" by religion are actually caused by men who transform religion to suit their own needs. And this definitely isn't its purpose!

By Sarasote (Sarasote) on Sunday, May 30, 2004 - 02:33 am: Edit

**this is a friendly discussion, i am not trying to offend anyone, if you feel offended, please stop reading :-D**

"I distinctly recall Plato proving the immobility of the earth and the movement of the sun... but then, by similar LOGIC, he could prove the earth moved around the immobile sun. Hmm... and then we have Ptolemy who agreed with Plato's first hypothesis, in theory, but introduced epicycles."

First of all, in science, there are things known as hypotheses, which are statements that are proposed theories that may not be correct. not everything "proposed" or "influenced" by science is correct; however, everything that has been PROVEN by science (e.g. laws, experiments, fundamental rules) do not contradict themselves. in the past, science began with hypotheses and the introduction of the simple machines. many of these hypotheses have been disproven, thats why they are still hypotheses and not laws. hypotheses/theories are NOT ALWAYS true. there IS a difference. when you refute a hypotheses with evidence/proof in science, it is not the same kind of contradication as that which occurs in religion. Take the Bible for example. Many people claim that the Bible is a nonfiction book, containing facts/stories that are 100% true; however, the different stories within the bible contradict themselves.

"And to say religion is becoming less important everyday is crazy! When do we need a more unifying force than today? I'm not saying that religion is perfect, but it certainly has the potential to do a whole lotta good for us. "

Religion IS becoming less and less important in everyday life. From the past to the present, religion has GREATLY declined. In the United States, less than 50% of Christians attend church. Atheisim is the fastest growing religion right now. More Christians state now, than ever in the past, that they do not read the bible nor practice any customs of their religion. Religion has fallen to a more insignificant position in most people's lives.

"the increasing number of intellectuals and scientists will be the death of religion"
what i was saying is in the future. as you can see, everyone you named were people from the past, and from common knowledge, religion RULED THE LIVES of the people of the past. almost every person was deathly religious. Scientific achievements and discoveries during Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Chopin, Emerson, Thoreau were, though significant at the time, were not amazing discoveries such as the double-helix by Watson and Crick, or the primordial experiment by (i forget his name i think its Eveston or something like that). these discoveries in genetics/biology have changed the views of many thinkers/scientists of today.

First the Holocaust was caused by conflict of religions. HItler wanted a "perfect Arenian (*spelling) race. Christian, blue-eyed, fair-haired. He killed off not only Jews but also Muslims (since Europe is predominantly Christian.)

The war in Iraq was more or less caused by conflicts through religion. We would not be in Iraq if it were not for terrorists bombing and committing suicide for Allah.

Other reasons religion was the root of all evil:
1) Queen Mary
2) Shi'ite vs Sunni (Iran versus Iraq wars)
3) Hundi vs Muslim (Pakistan versus India)
4) Savage destruction of the Tibetan monks in China
5) Crusades (holy wars)
6) Extinction of the Aztecs and Inca (yes it was greed but also Aztecs and Inca refused to conform to Christianity which the Spanish conquistadors were determined to force upon them)
7) African natives (every since 4000 BC, African tribes fought in the name of their Gods. they destroyed one another because "their God told them to)

"and even modern science has some major contradictions."
those arent even contradictions
1) there is an explanation for that i just dont know it off the top of my head
but the rest of your questions....they are just unknown facts about life. Just like in the past, there were thousands of "unanswered" questions. why is the sky blue? what are stars? does the sun orbit the planet? These are just unanswered questions that will eventually be answered with the advancement in technology. whether you believe it or not, scientific technologies/advancements/knowledges are still being discovered today. not all things in the universe have been answered yet. other questions similar to these would be, "why cant we build a spacecraft?" or "why can't we colonize mars?" our advancements in science have not allowed us to accomplish these feats yet, just like we do not know the answers to those questions. if we knew the answers to everything in life, there would no longer be a need for researchers/scientists.

By Conker (Conker) on Sunday, May 30, 2004 - 07:59 am: Edit

"Oh and Conker, um who's being the elitist here?"

Nobody's being elitist. I'm just explaining why atheists argue against the Bible rather than the Qu'ran. One because many of the atheists you've encountered are more familiar with the Western tradition, and two because many Muslims defend the Qu'ran from Western "infidels" using the aforementioned argument. I find this extremely peeving, and thus, I do not typically argue against the Qu'ran unless asked to do so specifically.

I have read the Bible, and it is indeed morally repugnant. But on many controversial issues, the Qu'ran is more direct, and therefore, I tend to dislike it more. In terms of hypocrisy, I think both are at about the same level, although the Bible is perhaps a bit worse.

By Conker (Conker) on Sunday, May 30, 2004 - 08:10 am: Edit

Many Christians do not understand the nature of science. I see that this misunderstanding has manifested itself here.

Science does not claim to know all the answers, as does religion. Science, by its very nature, is a process--a search for understanding, for truth--and it will often contradict and disagree with itself. It is flexible and allows for change as new discoveries are made.

Most religions, however, claim to know the truth. In the case of Christianity, one book is claimed as relevant for all time. If there is just one contradiction in the Holy Bible, then the whole religion is invalid.

Now Christians would claim here that there aren't any contradictions in the Bible. Well, I would like to say that the secularists on this forum are amateurs (myself included), and we could not provide you with the most poignant contradictions to refute. There are hardcore forums (one named Infidels, in fact, but I won't post the URL), if you are interested in going up against some brilliant atheists. But I warn you, no Christian has ever successfully defended the Bible.

By Conker (Conker) on Sunday, May 30, 2004 - 08:18 am: Edit

"And the Bible doesn't condemn homosexuals. It condemns acts of homosexuality. There's a BIG difference."

La même chose!

I don't hate Physics class. I just hate going to Physics class.


"Christianity is not a religion. It's a relationship. Religions are based on DOING things..."

Have you ever gone to church? Do you celebrate Christmas?

Even with your own definition of religion, Christianity is still a religion. But what's the real definition of religion?

"A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship."

By Jenesaispas (Jenesaispas) on Sunday, May 30, 2004 - 01:51 pm: Edit

Based on what I know of science (and I hope you do not think I am opposed in any way to it, because I love it), in its own nature it is essentially perfect. Science explains, or has the potential to explain, the phenomena of the universe. It serves as a unifying force of the knowledge of men, does it not? Since, you know, we are all working towards a common good--unless you're an evil scientist, but hopefully you are not. Because that would be bad, a fact to which countless Austin Powers movies attest.

I think religion serves a similar function, despite that people are wantonly moving away from it in these times of many trials and tribulations. Its purpose, ideally, is to unify the Earth so we can all make it a better place to live.

Oftentimes, both science and religion are distorted and molded to fit the agendas of men--vastly imperfect ones, at that. For example, I could say SCIENCE shouldn't exist because it did bring about the creation of the atomic bomb, H-bomb, etc... Science has been, throughout the ages, used as an agent of war! Think about it: gunpowder, bigger and better guns, jet fighters, automobiles, tanks, ballistic missiles...etc. From this perspective, I can say that science has been an anathema on and the "root of all evil"...of the civilized world... and has the overall quality of DISUNIFYING the world--the Cold War and Hiroshima/Nagasaki are pefect examples. But if I said this, it would, of course, be vastly inaccurate, becuase science has done a lot of good for the entire world, and has the potential to be extremely beneficial to the human race. But there will always be people abusing science and going against popular notion...

The same goes for religion! You don't reject science becuase of the harm it has done in the past, now, do you? All I'm saying is that it has tremendous potential, and if weren't for the many errors men have made in the past, we would see all the GOOD things it has done--not just the bad. For instance, religion has a tendency to unify peoples. Christ "conquered" nearly all of the Roman Empire, Gaul, England, Russia, etc., so that all were under the same banner of live, righteousness, etc. Was science/man able to achieve this? Religion united these diverse groups of peoples, just as Muhammed and Islam would unify another region (of scattered and "barbaric" tribes) a millenium later. Eventually, man and gov't corrupted this simple spirit and schisms proliferated. And while many may claim that all of the "divine wisdom" in the Bible/other holy books is common sense, how do you think it became engrained in our mindsets? Was it so sensible to people thousands of years ago? I tend to believe it was not... Besides, the role of the prophets is not always to abrogate the laws, (which, in essence, they are actually doing); however, it is to update them as man becomes more aware of his world and his perception and intelligence increase.

"Religion" isn't just a gregarious institution. It's a PERSONAL institution, if you will. Religion is a way of life, means through which to effect meaningful social chanage... or it should be. Personally I am neither Christian, nor Jew, nor Muslim... but I fully see the truth in the CORE teachings of each. As history has progressed and because man is inclined to error, these original teachings have been diluted and destroyed. This is terrible, I think we can all agree. But just because something hasn't worked 100% efficiently in the past does not mean this cannot change.

Oh, and I was under the assumption that nothing has been "PROVEN" by science. Such a claim seems preposterous. It's a work in progress, isn't it?... Things are constantly modified. While most things "natural laws/theories," i.e., the atomic theory, etc., seem to hold true, there are not completely proven. I am, however, in total agreeance with you that the universe is bound by natural laws, don't get me wrong.

I do not believe all religion claims to know the answers... since, by definition, God is all-powerful and unknowable. If God is unknowable, how on earth could anyone claim to know the answers? I personally make no such claim.

I'm not saying the Bible is perfect--it was penned by men so that seems extremely unlikely. I am aware of the contradictions but I, unlike many others, recognize that the Bible isn't a historical/scientific textbook. If you look at the teachings, there is immense wisdom laden in the words... and these applies to ANY of the world's major religions.

And am I the only one left who cares to maintain this discussion in favor of religion/God/civilization? (just kidding...)Oh, woe is me! :)

By Conker (Conker) on Sunday, May 30, 2004 - 09:17 pm: Edit

I agree that it is wrong to dismiss religion based on how some men have interpreted it. However, I disagree that religion is more positive than negative. Despite the benefits of unification, I think that religion itself was only a fraction of the reason the Holy Roman Empire united, etc. More often that not, religion has caused strife. And don't forget, the pre-Islamic "barbarian" tribes did have religion.

You discuss that religion is a personal thing. I totally agree. Everyone must strive for their own personal spiritual fulfillment. However, this is not "religion". Religion implies an institution (i.e. going to church). If people want to believe in Jesus Christ, I not only defend their right to do so but I defend it. But so many Christians make a big deal out of going to church every Saturday, and celebrating Christmas and Easter with great vigor, and I wonder, "Is this necessary?" I think that having faith is important; having religion is not.

By Emeraldkity4 (Emeraldkity4) on Sunday, May 30, 2004 - 09:52 pm: Edit

how literally should we interpret the Christian bible?
Leviticus 20:9 For every one who curses his father or his mother shall be put to death; he has cursed his father or his mother, his blood is upon him.

Well if we adhere to these strict rules, this one alone would result in NUMEROUS available parking spaces, even in Los Angeles! WooHoo!

By Candi1657 (Candi1657) on Sunday, May 30, 2004 - 10:35 pm: Edit

"More often that not, religion has caused strife."

No, religion doesn't cause strife, people cause strife. People have managed to ruin every good thing ever created. Take sex, for example. A beautiful thing now sullied in so many ways. It's human nature to take something that isn't inherently evil and use it to gain power and to subjugate other individuals to its benefit.

By Thedad (Thedad) on Sunday, May 30, 2004 - 10:36 pm: Edit

Problems of interpretation:

* you have to understand the context and language of when various parts were written

* you have to understand the context of how and when the various books were compiled/edited

If your "literal interpretation" is based on the English of the King James Version, you're making some horrible mistakes, notwithstanding that the KJV was one of the most successful enterprises ever produced by a committee. It's certainly an exericse in foolishness to set one's position on that foundation.


Just a small linguistic point: the "forty" used in the OT was idiomatic for "many," not literally "forty." Cf., "I've got a million things to do."

The winners of theological disputes determine what made it "in" to the canon, both in OT and NT;
the Deuteronomists won some major battles so that their slants prevailed in the OT and several of the early church councils yielded some highly political renderings of the NT.

For a fairly accessible popular light on some of the latter, I recommend THE GNOSTIC GOSPELS by Elaine Pagel, which draws upon writings contemporary with the gospels discovered at Nag Hammadi (sp.?) in the latter half of the last century.

As far as Biblical-based law, give the literalists their head and we'd have legalized slavery, the legal subordination of women, and several other unsavory aspects. I don't care for sharia, whether the ayahtollahs are Christian or Muslim doesn't matter.

By Cornellhopeful (Cornellhopeful) on Sunday, May 30, 2004 - 11:00 pm: Edit

wow isn't this thread interesting...

It is my understanding that the early Church did not include the so-called "gnostic gospels" in the Bible b/c they contradicted the other gospels and didn't hold consistent views on the nature of Christ, man, God, etc. Basically it was too "Pagan/Eastern".

To me, it makes no sense to interpret the Bible. Yes, it is important to read it, but interpreting it is where the problems come from. As a Catholic, I believe that the Bible is the Word of God, infallible. So, we need an infallible authority to interpret it, thus we have the Church. The problems arise when we have people claiming to know what the Bible says, thus all the various churches being "invented" every year. Various "branches" of Christianity do not believe that science is at odds with religion. I don't think that a religious person would doubt the reality of gravity. Religion does not create problems, it is how the practitioners view religion, ie. fundamentalists of ALL religions.

By Conker (Conker) on Monday, May 31, 2004 - 04:15 am: Edit

"As a Catholic, I believe that the Bible is the Word of God, infallible."

Which means that there can be no contradictions. You can claim that many of the myths (i.e. the creation, the flood) are subject to interpretation (although you don't convince me), but there are certain parts of the Bible that are just plain wrong any way you slice it. To say that Bible is infallible is dangerous ground to tread upon.

It is possible to say that the Bible is history, as it is based upon antiquated interpretations of oral tradition and natural phenomenons. It contains inspirational codes, whether divinely inspired or not; some of which can be applied to modern everyday life.


"So, we need an infallible authority to interpret it, thus we have the Church."

Would this be the same Church that molests little children? Hardly is the church infallible. They are humans, who are not any more divine than the average human being.


"I don't think that a religious person would doubt the reality of gravity."

But scientists don't sit around and study gravity all day. Religion is at odds with science in many ways. Much antagonism manifests itself most apparently in the Big Bang and evolution.

By Jenesaispas (Jenesaispas) on Monday, May 31, 2004 - 07:45 am: Edit

The Bible definitely isn't infallible. After all, whom did God inspire to write it? Men. And any man is far from perfect (excluding the prophets).

And the time has definitely passed when we need the "infallible authority to interpet it." You are a competent human being, capable of reading and understanding the Bible--or at least trying to understand the spiritual messages. But the Bible shouldn't really be considered history. Its purpose is not to give a history lesson. Where's the sense in that? Why on earth would God inspire men to write a history textbook? There seems to be something missing from that scenario...

By Apchemreject (Apchemreject) on Monday, May 31, 2004 - 11:00 am: Edit

"And the Bible doesn't condemn homosexuals. It condemns acts of homosexuality. There's a BIG difference."
Hmmm... I think there would be no point to having homosexuals around if you are going to condemn their acts.

By Sarasote (Sarasote) on Monday, May 31, 2004 - 03:05 pm: Edit

there is a big difference between religion and science. religion has caused many wars while science has been used as an agent of war. Though science has caused numerous deaths such as the atomic bomb, science is often corrupted by humans to be used in ill ways. the positive/pros of scientific advancements outweight the negatives. Vaccines, sanitation, surgery, medicine have all saved millions if not billions of lives.

Religion, on the other hand, has created intolerance, prejudice and bigotry, abhorrence within our society, beliefs of supremacy, strife (as said before) and worst of all, war. Religion, since the very beginning, introduced the social pyramid. In Christianity, religiously-affiliated men and their families were at the top, slowly working down the pyramid. In Hinduism, the religion formed a caste-system. Some of you very religious people may think that "Eve's eating the apple" caused evil to grow, really things such as poverty, strife, and war sprouted from religion.

It is impossible to say the Bible is infallible, even if you are Christian. The Bible was finished/created more than 200-300 years after Jesus' death. Such as in the "telephone" game, stories that have been passed down from generation to generation are often changed. This is the same. Though some claim the disciples "lived for 400 years" and remembered everything, this is impossible. The ones who finished the Bible 250 years after Jesus' death could not have possibly been there or have even known Jesus and what he did/preached. These interpretations are flawed just from the timeframe.

"As a Catholic, I believe that the Bible is the Word of God, infallible"
I respect if you are a believer and whatnot but i personally do not understand how anyone can believe that the Bible is infallible. If you have ever read the Bible from the beginning to the end, you would realize that almost everything stated in the Bible contradicts one another.

Just to state a few exaggerations, how could Adam have lived for 900 years? He was still human and his offspring would have been able to live the same number. The stories within the Bible telling the tale of creation, the flood, the sins are so embellished and exaggerated that they are just incredible.

no one has answered this: "why did God create the act of homosexuality when he condemns it?"

By Jenesaispas (Jenesaispas) on Monday, May 31, 2004 - 04:51 pm: Edit

"Religion, on the other hand, has created intolerance, prejudice and bigotry, abhorrence within our society, beliefs of supremacy, strife (as said before) and worst of all, war."

I have said this numerous times: Religion DOES NOT cause any of this! MEN cause it. You can't blame religion for human nature and society's ills. If I really wanted to kill a person, then if I say I am doing it out of religion, was the death caused by religion? Of course not.

"...science is often corrupted by humans to be used in ill ways. the positive/pros of scientific advancements outweight the negatives."

How haven't men corrupted religion? How is this different from the corrupting of science? In the early days of Christianity, of Islam, etc., these ideas which you attribute religion as the primary cause were actually not present. Men intoduced them because that is our nature! Come on, now. Once men achieve high rank, why would they want to return to society? Once they feel that they themselves are more important than the people they supposedly "serve"... then this concept breaks down, as has been shown numerous times. Religion (and God) in no way facilitated the introduction of these ideas. And I'm pretty sure things like poverty, strife, and war have always been a part of human history, long before the organized institution of religion came along, so just because these ideas corrupt religion doesn't mean religion causes these thigns.

And if men "corrupt" science just as they "corrupt" religion, how can you just reject religion?

Religion in its purest form offers hope, peace, unity, etc. This is its main benefit--and who could ask for anything more? If we could just revert to the early days of the religion, or join a new one, and exclude ideas of selfishness, poverty, etc., why shouldn't we? The benefits are clearly innumerable. All I'm saying is to keep an open mind and not immediately exclude the institution of religion based on its past.

And, in reponse to your last query: it's called free will. People can do as they choose because they have been endowed with the object of free will. It's the same answer to the questions, "Why did God create murder if he condemns it," "Why did God create suffering," ad infinitum.

By Unluckycharms (Unluckycharms) on Monday, May 31, 2004 - 05:52 pm: Edit

The Bible is the most ingenious work of fiction that ever existed, and nothing more.

Want some food for thought? Here are contradictions taken right out of the Bible.

GE 1:3-5 On the first day, God created light, then separated light and darkness.
GE 1:14-19 The sun (which separates night and day) wasn't created until the fourth day.

GE 1:11-12, 26-27 Trees were created before man was created.
GE 2:4-9 Man was created before trees were created.

GE 1:20-21, 26-27 Birds were created before man was created.
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before birds were created.

GE 1:24-27 Animals were created before man was created.
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before animals were created.

GE 1:26-27 Man and woman were created at the same time.
GE 2:7, 21-22 Man was created first, woman sometime later.

GE 1:31 God was pleased with his creation.
GE 6:5-6 God was not pleased with his creation.
(Note: That God should be displeased is inconsistent with the concept of omniscience.)

GE 6:6. EX 32:14, NU 14:20, 1SA 15:35, 2SA 24:16 God does change his mind.
NU 23:19-20, IS 15:29, JA 1:17 God does not change his mind.

The fastest way to become an atheist is to read the bible, and see how many contradictions are in it. These are only a few.

Also keep in mind that in the bible, it tells us that it is ok to sell your daughter into slavery, that women are vastly inferior to men, and that if someone is different, then you should kill them.

I sure want MY children learning about such wonderful virtues of the bible.

By Bumblebee83 (Bumblebee83) on Monday, May 31, 2004 - 06:00 pm: Edit

unluckycharms, you said it so nicely!! Although one thing (and I agree with you completly), god allegedly created man before woman becasue the bible leaves out someone I find to be rather important...Lilith, who was Adam's first wife, who should be in the OT (and is if you read the Jewish version of it) so part of that comes from convient omissions by the church But I agree. Thers also a part about how killing kids, or rather beating their heads on rocks, is a noble cause

By Sarasote (Sarasote) on Monday, May 31, 2004 - 06:03 pm: Edit

There are religions in the world that advocate killing/intolerance of other religions, especially in the Mideast. I am not directly referring to Christianity. However, it is part of religion to convert/spread your religion to others who do not practice it. For thousands of years now, religion has been preached and pressed upon others in order to gain more followers, eventually leading to strong intolerance. Though religion's first intentions were not to create intolerance and bigotry, thats what has resulted. Though religion may have originally been a good idea, corruption of religion began even during the biblical times. And throughout the past religion has become even more corrupted. Though its original intentions were not ill, today and for the past hundreds of years, religion has influenced men to begin war, become intolerable, support bigotry and religion's corruption is irreversible.

"And I'm pretty sure things like poverty, strife, and war have always been a part of human history, long before the organized institution of religion came along, so just because these ideas corrupt religion doesn't mean religion causes these thigns"
Yes, war/poverty/strife have been around before religion; however, the argument im making is that religion has caused even more war. Most of the roots of wars/international conflicts can be traced back to religious conflicts.

"Religion in its purest form offers hope, peace, unity"
This may have been true at one point in time however, today, it no longer is.

"And, in reponse to your last query: it's called free will."
Then you are not completely Christian. Christianity preaches destiny, a pre-destined/chosen path. Many Christians believe there is no free will and that everything you do/all the choices you make have been pre-determined. If you are destined to be a homosexual....that is God's choosing. Also, homosexuality is proven to be genetic. This isn't free will.

unluckycharm, well said

By Goodchocolate (Goodchocolate) on Monday, May 31, 2004 - 06:19 pm: Edit

homosexuality is proven to be genetic

No it's not. At least not in humans.

By Jenesaispas (Jenesaispas) on Monday, May 31, 2004 - 06:40 pm: Edit

Let me define religion for you, and this is my personal defintion. I would consider "religion" to be adherence to the teachings of a particular prophet from God, be he Christ, Moses, Mohammed, etc. Now, it is clear that this kind of religion does not really exist in our society... But, you must realize these aren't the only choices. You could still be a Christian without attending church.

The religion that advocates killing (if you're referring to some parts of Islam, and I'm assuming you are), arne't the true religion. It's what certain groups/individuals use to justify killing. In these instances, it serves as a guise and the members aren't really part of that religion. You'll see that Muhammed merely engaged in conflict to defend himself against the slew of persecution constantly directed against him. No religion from God would EVER advocate killing. (And I would say only some--not most--of the roots of int'l/domestic conflicts are due to religious conflicts."

I have never said that I was a Christian. Besides, the idea of "predestination" is quite preposterous. That's like saying, "I know the sun will set tonight at 6:24pm." And, of course, the sun sets at that time. But that doesn't mean a foreknowledge of this CAUSED it to happen...

By reason, no one is bound by pre-determined lives... and you say that homosexuality is "proven to be genetic." No phenotypic expression (with the exception of a few obvious traits) is based solely on genes... Rather, it is highly believed genetics is a component of some homosexuality. While there may be a very small portion of the population with such a genotype, it is, as I said, very, very small. But I feel that it is still possible to move away from this and seek a higher station.

Fundamentally, I agree with you, Sarasote. The major organized religions of today are corrupt, they are decadent. There is no hope of salvaging them. Yet I still find solace in a religion that offers hope for the future--and it works for me, so...

With respect to unluckycharm's post... perhaps when God "created light," it's referring to good. And when he separated darkness from light... couldn't this be good from evil? And maybe he always had the idea of creating humans, and that was his ultimate goal. So, in essence, humans were created "first," yet they did not evolve until the very end...

Just some thoughts, I don't really know whether or not they're true.

I'm not going to post anymore in this discussion... it is rather useless. It's hard for my to argue in favor of a specific religion when I'm not even a follower, per se, of that religion. So if you have any questions I'd be happy to reply via email.

By Candi1657 (Candi1657) on Monday, May 31, 2004 - 07:14 pm: Edit

Oh, the ignorance.

"Then you are not completely Christian. Christianity preaches destiny, a pre-destined/chosen path. Many Christians believe there is no free will and that everything you do/all the choices you make have been pre-determined."

I urge you to brush up on your Bible. Free will is probably the most important component of Christianity. You are free to follow Christ or not, if you choose. If one's destiny is pre-determined, what is the point of conversion or proselytization?

By Sarasote (Sarasote) on Monday, May 31, 2004 - 07:18 pm: Edit

free will isnt talking about following christ or not.

"If one's destiny is pre-determined, what is the point of conversion or proselytization? "

exactly. what is the point? many christians do in fact believe in destiny/fate, in pre-determined life because many parts of the bible preach that. you tell me what the point of conversion is. Perhaps from another point of view, you are destined to convert.

Free will is when you make/choose your own decision/path in life. Many people, not just Christians (also Buddhists, Shintoists, however, not because of god) feel that their lives have been pre-determined at birth. all the choices they make during their life time has already been chosen for them. Free will is not talking about whether you are free to follow Christ or not.

By Candi1657 (Candi1657) on Monday, May 31, 2004 - 08:14 pm: Edit

You don't get it. Certainly, a decision to follow Christ or not is an important component of free will.

"Free will is when you make/choose your own decision/path in life."

Isn't that exactly what a decision to follow Christ or not IS???

What parts of the Bible are you referring to? Enlighten me.

I still have yet to find the large quantities of Christians that believe in pre-destination. The concept is more un-Christian than the other way around.

By Sarasote (Sarasote) on Monday, May 31, 2004 - 08:27 pm: Edit

well first off to begin i will search for passages but numerous passages within the bible refer to "god's foresight/knowledge of you path" insinuating a pre-determined path.

"I still have yet to find the large quantities of Christians that believe in pre-destination. The concept is more un-Christian than the other way around. "
umm unless you don't go out in the world often, there are many people who believe in pre-destination lol.

"Free will is when you make/choose your own decision/path in life."

Isn't that exactly what a decision to follow Christ or not IS???

**The argument is that whether you decide to follow Christ or not, your decision was already pre-determined. you are fated/chosen to choose your decision. if you choose to follow Christ, you were destined to follow Christ. if you don't, you weren't**

i dont know what you are arguing because thats what pre-destination is, not that i believe in it.

By Candi1657 (Candi1657) on Monday, May 31, 2004 - 08:38 pm: Edit

It's really frustrating to argue with you, because you really DON'T get what I'm saying. You're making me itch. No one's arguing over the meaning of pre-destination!!!

By Jajas2 (Jajas2) on Monday, May 31, 2004 - 11:08 pm: Edit

Yes, Candi, many christians do beleive in predestination. In fact, that caused a major schism in the time of Martin Luther and led to Calvinism and Presbyterianism. Their basic argument was that God knows all and sees all. Therefore God must see the future, or else he is not truly omnipotent and omniscient. Therefore, God will know, before you are born, whether you will get into heaven or not. It really is a paradox: God must know the future, but if God knows the future he must create some sould simply to send them to hell. Why would God do that? And if he doesnt do that, can he not know the future? Someone answer that.

P.S. Fun Fact: Ancient Hebrews were not monotheists at all, but henotheists. They worshipped many gods, with Yahweh being supreme. Monotheism only came about during the exile and supreme monotheism, the beleive that there was one God period, only came about a few hundred years before Christ.

By Justice (Justice) on Monday, May 31, 2004 - 11:58 pm: Edit

Great point jajas2. To summarize:

Postulate of Religion: God knows and sees all--God is omnipotent and omnipresent.

Corollary: Therefore, God can see into the future--since he knows all, if he does not know the future, then he is not all-powerful.

Postulate of Man: Man is an entity who can be considered an object within God's knowledge. (not really necessary, just for good measure)

Therefore, God knows the future of man.

Postulate: Man's future involves the existence of afterlife.

Postulate: man is a generalizable term.

Therefore, God knows the future of all men.

Postulate: God creates all men.

Therefore, God creates all men knowing the destination of their journey.

Therefore---predestination.

Postulate: Man has free will.

Fatal contradiction.

One of those postulates must be false. Pick your poison...

By Unluckycharms (Unluckycharms) on Tuesday, June 01, 2004 - 04:01 pm: Edit

Excellently done, Justice.

By Apocalypse_Now (Apocalypse_Now) on Tuesday, June 01, 2004 - 06:58 pm: Edit

God is not all-powerful, because he cannot create a wall that he can't jump.

Sorry if this little proof has already been brought up half a dozen times; I'm just too lazy to check all the posts.

By Gottagetout (Gottagetout) on Tuesday, June 01, 2004 - 09:18 pm: Edit

Apocalypse_Now:

Not really a proof. The same could be said in mathematics about the concept of infinity. I could say that there exists no integer larger than infinity. Then you'd say, "No, infinity + 1 is larger than infinity and therefore there exists an integer larger than infinity." You'd be mistaken however, because infinity + 1 is still infinity.

Also, the definition of aspects of reality through the negative is dubious at best.

By Jenesaispas (Jenesaispas) on Tuesday, June 01, 2004 - 09:42 pm: Edit

I can't really resist the urge to post anymore. I just wanna respond to the subject of free will.

God or not, the subject of free will is up for debate. Let's say God doens't exist... it's just the universe out there and no cosmic divinity. However, free will is still constrained. In the end, ultimately, our "chosen" path is constrained. Our life is mapped out "by the stars," as it is said. No matter what we do, our final actions are definite, unchangeable. But the question really is, is does this mean our futures are out of our control?

I've have to respond in the negative. Just because our futures are known doesn't mean that this knowledge caused us to act. I can know things, like, as I said before, the time of sunset, but my prior knowledge didn't cause the sunset when, lo and behold, it did occur. Only we carve our destinies... but our destinies that we make have been written down long before we ever came into existence.

By Beero1000 (Beero1000) on Wednesday, June 02, 2004 - 08:32 pm: Edit

God or not, the subject of free will is up for debate. Let's say God doens't exist... it's just the universe out there and no cosmic divinity. However, free will is still constrained. In the end, ultimately, our "chosen" path is constrained. Our life is mapped out "by the stars," as it is said. No matter what we do, our final actions are definite, unchangeable. But the question really is, is does this mean our futures are out of our control?

** we're not arguing about whether or not free will is constrained but the fact that there is a contradiction in the bible about free will and omniscience

By Priglet (Priglet) on Thursday, June 03, 2004 - 08:51 pm: Edit

God creates all men knowing the destiny of their journey. Each man makes his choices. God knows what these choices will be and allows them. Man, a being who does not exist before he is conceived (since he is not eternal)shapes and is shaped by his life. Through Christ, God extends his grace, a grace which enables each man to make the right choice, to become a new Adam free from his sin-filled past. God frees man from the determinism of Adam. It is up to each man to make his choice. Of course, I'm sure there are flaws in this. My presbyterian friends would pick it apart, but it's just a suggestion.

The other way to look at it is that God is a being outside of time (although He chose to enter it at one point). Therefore "pre" has no meaning for Him.

By Unluckycharms (Unluckycharms) on Friday, June 04, 2004 - 09:07 am: Edit

"God knows what these choices will be and allows them."

Yes, that would be predestination.

By Apocalypse_Now (Apocalypse_Now) on Saturday, June 05, 2004 - 01:20 pm: Edit

Gottagetout, correct me if i'm wrong, but i thought that infinity was not a number. Rather it is a description. So the statement "there exists no integer greater than infinity" really doesn't make any sense. It's like saying there exists no integer greater than an apple. A gibberish statement is very difficult to prove false. Anyway I don't know much about formal logic and have no idea what your last statement was about. So maybe you could dumb it down a bit and explain to me what the hell you're talking about. I still don't see what's wrong with my argument.

By Cornellhopeful (Cornellhopeful) on Sunday, June 06, 2004 - 03:17 pm: Edit

there is no contradiction b/w free will and God's omniscience. We all have the free will to do whatever we want, to choose. God KNOWS already what we will choose, but that does not impair our ability to choose.

""So, we need an infallible authority to interpret it, thus we have the Church."

Would this be the same Church that molests little children? Hardly is the church infallible. They are humans, who are not any more divine than the average human being."
--Exactly. the Church is not made up of superhuman beings. We are all humans. The CHURCH did not molest those children, humans did. It has always been the belief of Christianity that the Church will contain good and bad people, and not all will attain salvation. Thus this does not stop our belief that the Church is infallible. It is infallible only when speaking on faith and morals. I find it interesting that Protestants(not to say that you are one) can accept that God can do anything, but they can't accept that He would leave us a Church to discern Scripture infallibly or to speak infallibly about beliefs.

By Farrahday (Farrahday) on Sunday, June 06, 2004 - 07:45 pm: Edit

Okay, I havent read all of the posts on here, because, honestly, I got bored. So what I have to say might have been said already.

First of all, christianity, islam, and judiasm, are almost enitirely the same in their main principle, their stories, and their values. So when you want to answer the big questions through a different religious perspective, dont switch from chrisitianity to judiasm, switch from christianity to buddhism.

Secondly, religion is not literal. If there is a higher power, then all of religion is simply an explanation of that. The Bible, and other religious texts, are not meant to be interpreted literally. Jesus did not actually walk on water. But that does not mean he is of no consequence. Real religion is greater than how many years the universe has existed, and whether carbon dating is accurate. Athiest or zealot, you are missing the point of the debate when you concern yourself with basic facts. Is there a higher power, something greater than chemical elements? It is not something you can either prove or disprove. Religion has often been twisted to impose morality or somebody else's values.

Overall, either position is worthy of respect as long as someone has created their view thoughtfully. To disrespect either is to show your own ignorance.

By Cornellhopeful (Cornellhopeful) on Sunday, June 06, 2004 - 08:47 pm: Edit

See, that's where the problems come in. Are the religious texts supposed to be taken literally. Then you get into fundamentalism, etc. Jesus MIGHT have actually walked on water. He might not have. Traditional Christianity sees Jesus as true God and true man. Thus, there wouldn't be a problem with him walking on water. Miracles happen. However, Traditional Christianity can also say that the stories of the Bible explain universal truths. The universe might not have been created the way it's described in Genesis, but the main thing to realize is that God is the creator of the universe and he created everything.
Christianity, Islam, and Judaism are NOT almost entirely the same in their main principle, stories, and values. They all share a common history, and all do refer to the Bible, though the authority given to the Bible or different parts(old/new testaments) may be different. However, there are MANY theological differences. The main one of which is the nature of God. Traditional Christianity sees God as a Trinity: one God, three persons. Islam and Judaism do not recognize the Trinity, however they do agree that God is one. On the point that all religion is an explanation of the Higher Power, I slightly agree with that. I hold the Catholic view that there is only one God. However, we believe that all religions hold certain religious truths. You do not have to be Christian to attain salvation, though it may be an "easier" way. Before Christianity, people did experience God through their respective practices, and they still do. However, we believe that he was fully revealed to us through Christ, and that we can fully experience him through the Mass and Christian prayer. Other faiths DO experience God, though in a DIFFERENT way. Yes, Jesus is the ONLY way to Heaven, but that doesn't mean that you have to be Christian. It just means that if a Hindu, Buddhist, Muslim, etc. attains salvation, it is through the universal saving power of Christ. So, although all religions may not be the same, or hold the same views on Divinity, we all hold certain parts of the truth. Switching from Christianity to Judaism is a BIG switch. Judaism does not recognize Jesus Christ as God or the Messiah. It does not recognize the Trinity, the Church, the New Testament, etc. That is why they are different religions that share common histories.

By Priglet (Priglet) on Sunday, June 06, 2004 - 10:49 pm: Edit

Hurray Cornellhopeful! I hope you get there. Way to cut to the heart of the matter.


Report an offensive message on this page    E-mail this page to a friend
Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.

Administrator's Control Panel -- Board Moderators Only
Administer Page