|
Sex & Love (pg. 6)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Boomer187 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Slylee
I posted about sex and love, and a little bit of religion, but i'm not very educated on the topic of religion, so I kept it simple.
I guess they all go hand in hand...plus the original post (thread starter) brought up religion. I am really impressed with the general knowledge of most TA's on here. Bunch of smarty pants:D |
I am so smrt.
actually this turned into a religious battle. Atheists imposing their views on christians, christians imposing their views on atheist.
and for some reason I think I came off as a jesus freak. Hehe. but i think I have said and questioned all that I can, so unless you guys reply with some rubbish....which I doubt you will...im done. |
|
|
| {b.s.e.} |
Can we really let such a timeless thread end like this? :conf:
sure. ;) |
|
|
| Floorfiller |
| quote: | Originally posted by Slylee
I posted about sex and love, and a little bit of religion, but i'm not very educated on the topic of religion, so I kept it simple.
I guess they all go hand in hand...plus the original post (thread starter) brought up religion. I am really impressed with the general knowledge of most TA's on here. Bunch of smarty pants:D |
slylee you know you're smart too...maybe just not on how to argue about religion hehehe... |
|
|
| Floorfiller |
| quote: | Originally posted by tranceaholic
i agree with alot of what u say..although i am a devoted christian..there is alot of stuff i find hard to believe..i do not think if u sin once then thats it to hell u go cause god is the only one is without sin..i do not believe that if u r not christian then to hell u go..cause some people r born into a religion and they could be alot better person than most christians does that mean still they r goin to hell..lets remember that christianity is the one of the first religion and jesus is a jew and all other religions came after that so i dont think he mentioned anything about them..i also find it strange having an extra collection to put a new 30k roof where sister churches having trouble feeding thhier people..christianity is about humblness where does it say that churches must look like castles? at the end of the day the way i view things is i believe in god and his learnings..u have the ten commandments that sum up the sins of the world. u should try to stay away from them but if u do comit them and ask for forgivness..try to live a good life by loving everybody,be forgiving and helpful,do not hate,do not judge and live a hmble life..at the end of the day u r judged on a balanced situation the good against the bad. thats what I think of religion..why i believe in it..simple makes sence to me,provides meaningful guidelines,makes me feel good and the most important reason i actually FEEL IT AND THE PRESENCE OF GOD..thank u i am out... |
ok just one more thing to say and then that will be it hehehe...
as far as other religions. i believe that the bible (although i don't remember exactly) says something about how the jews pre-christ will not go to hell because they lived in an age before christ and therefore were not given the chance to learn his teachings, but they are also kept out of heaven. as far as other religions after his time they are going to hell because they do not except the teachings of the messiah hehehe.
i also think that you proved my earlier point about being humble. what i was trying to say is that if the bishops of the church are supposedly the most capable of teaching the beliefs of the religion, then shouldn't they be better represenatives of the ideals of the church than any of the followers? so then, the fact that they were corrupt and engaged in bribery and all of that kinda stuff...blah blah blah...anyway, they are obviously less then the ideal canidates to impose beliefs on others and actually were just their for power...it just kinda makes you wonder where the religion went in religion.... |
|
|
| tranceaholic |
| quote: | Originally posted by Floorfiller
ok just one more thing to say and then that will be it hehehe...
as far as other religions. i believe that the bible (although i don't remember exactly) says something about how the jews pre-christ will not go to hell because they lived in an age before christ and therefore were not given the chance to learn his teachings, but they are also kept out of heaven. as far as other religions after his time they are going to hell because they do not except the teachings of the messiah hehehe.
i also think that you proved my earlier point about being humble. what i was trying to say is that if the bishops of the church are supposedly the most capable of teaching the beliefs of the religion, then shouldn't they be better represenatives of the ideals of the church than any of the followers? so then, the fact that they were corrupt and engaged in bribery and all of that kinda stuff...blah blah blah...anyway, they are obviously less then the ideal canidates to impose beliefs on others and actually were just their for power...it just kinda makes you wonder where the religion went in religion.... |
if u want to see humblness..then visit monks..the small houses they live in..the simple food they eat..the simple clothes they wear..that is a true symbol of christianity..i had the pleasure of visitng and it is truly humbling the dedication and the simple life they lead..now we come to see the church wow,the golden crosses,the rings,the cups all that.i dont think thats how jesus wanted..so if u ever visit monks u will see how it suppose to be..i go to church for comunion and the prayers..if it wasnt for comunion i can might as well pray at home..every time a priest gives a speech nowadays they slide in money and how they need extra collections..that bothers me alot so i jst pray til he is done with the money talk..so i think the monastary and the monks r the true way on how religious symbols r..churches were like that once til money got into it. visit a monastary if u can...it is truly humbling. |
|
|
| davinox |
No, listen, the answer lies below.
What completely opened up my life was this. Please read carefully, this is important.
You can narrow yourself down to TWO things.
1) Your senses. (Sight, smell, taste, touch, hearing)
2) Your instincts and your genetic dispositions.
This reality, which seems so strange, is because it is all an illusion built by your brain with the senses it has. Do you really think all of existence can be summed up through our 5 senses?
It could, but the way our Universe looks, it seems HIGHLY, HIGHLY, HIGHLY, HIGHLY unlikely.
IF, and this is important, IF anyone thinks that we as humans have fully grasped the meaning of existence, if any religion or scientific framework for our universe fully incompasses the ultimate reality that exists, PLEASE PLEASE PM ME.
PLEASE.
Think about it. Your reality is built by your mind. Reality is BUILT BY YOUR MIND.
A perfect example is when you dream. When you dream, you are utterly convinced that that alternative universe is the REAL reality. Oh, and now we are utterly convinced that our senses give us the whole picture, that the sound waves and light waves that processed in our brain can give us a picture of a pictureless divine being.
Silly, silly. Ridiculous.
You need faith to assume ANYTHING, not just religion. Religion, however, you need to assume so much, to the point of ridiculousness. If anyone claims that their religion is likely, once again, PM me and I can explain how it is philosophically and logically incredibly unlikely.
Remember, you can prove nothing. You can PROVE NOTHING. Believe what you want, anything can be true; ultimate reality could be anything, but wouldn't it just be easier to simply believe that?
All of a sudden, existence opens up into a personal thing, a wonderful dreamland of possibilities. That is what life is like for me. Existence is unexplainable because most likely we have a very small glimpse of real existence. |
|
|
| tranceaholic |
when u say u can prove nothing isnt that saying that everything is wrong...that means i am wrong and u r wrong and everybosy is wrong..i think for every wrong there is a right..we cant be all wrong..and do we really need proof for everything..how bout feeling n emotions..there is a difference between thinking n feeling..thinking needs proof while feeling doesnt need any..if u proof nothing than u r doubting everything..
i would like to add that this is the first debate thread to go 5 pages without flaming..good job |
|
|
| Illusion |
Stop hijacking my thread with your religious nonsense!
Or else :whip: |
|
|
| Zombie0915 |
lol sorry about the hijackery, I know I'm bringing this really old thread back from the dead but I said I would come back with some literature that explains the rationale for why people believe in God, and I found this today then remembered this thred, so have a look eh?
http://www.apologeticspress.org/rr/rr1995/r&r9505a.htm
So if you buy the arguments here, then you agree that there is a god, somebody replied to me earlier asking what makes me think that this god is the same one that the bible talks about, to that I say:
I have no friggin clue, all I know is that it isn't me! To tell you the truth I've been pretty confused as to what I believe lately, but I do know that I believe something, weather it is part of an established religion or not is something I will find out later.
Now if you want to go back to the topic. I am also one of the many people who are disobeying the christian teaching about abstinence and whatnot, there are a bunch of christian ideas that don't sit too well with me but I'm still not so sure if I should abandon the religion alltogether because of them just yet. I love my gf very much and we have sex whenever we feel the urge to do so. I believe I have been "born again" but am no longer seeking forgiveness for what I have been doing with her because I don't think that it is wrong. Some people say that once yer saved thats it and everything is forgiven, others think that if you sin and time and time again and continue to ask forgiveness, eventualy God knows that you aren't being sincere about it and he sends you to hell. Weather or not im going to hell for this(if it exists) is completely beyond me, but while I'm still here I'm going to do lotsa ing!:disbelief |
|
|
| Arbiter |
| quote: | Originally posted by Zombie0915 lol sorry about the hijackery, I know I'm bringing this really old thread back from the dead but I said I would come back with some literature that explains the rationale for why people believe in God, and I found this today then remembered this thred, so have a look eh?
http://www.apologeticspress.org/rr/rr1995/r&r9505a.htm
So if you buy the arguments here, then you agree that there is a god, somebody replied to me earlier asking what makes me think that this god is the same one that the bible talks about, to that I say:
I have no friggin clue, all I know is that it isn't me! To tell you the truth I've been pretty confused as to what I believe lately, but I do know that I believe something, weather it is part of an established religion or not is something I will find out later. |
Most of the article is composed of fallacious red herrings and arguments from ignorance. Therefore I'll only bother addressing the conclusion unless clarification is needed later:
| quote: |
The law of cause and effect, and the cosmological argument based upon that law, have serious implications in every field of human endeavor. The Universe is here, and must have an adequate antecedent cause. In addressing this problem, R.L. Wysong commented:
Everyone concludes naturally and comfortably that highly ordered and designed items (machines, houses, etc.) owe existence to a designer. It is unnatural to conclude otherwise. But evolution asks us to break stride from what is natural to believe and then believe in that which is unnatural, unreasonable, and...unbelievable.... The basis for this departure from what is natural and reasonable to believe is not fact, observation, or experience but rather unreasonable extrapolations from abstract probabilities, mathematics, and philosophy (1976, p. 412, first ellipsis in orig.).
Dr. Wysong then presented an interesting historical case to illustrate his point. Some years ago, scientists were called to Great Britain to study orderly patterns of concentric rocks and holes—a find designated as Stonehenge. As studies progressed, it became apparent that these patterns had been designed specifically to allow certain astronomical predictions. Many questions (e.g., how ancient peoples were able to construct an astronomical observatory, how the data derived from their studies were used, etc.) remain unsolved. But one thing is known—the cause of Stonehenge was intelligent design.
Now, suggested Dr. Wysong, compare Stonehenge to the situation paralleling the origin of the Universe, and of life itself. We study life, observe its functions, contemplate its complexity (which defies duplication even by intelligent men with the most advanced methodology and technology), and what are we to conclude? Stonehenge might have been produced by the erosion of a mountain, or by catastrophic natural forces working in conjunction with meteorites to produce rock formations and concentric holes. But what scientist or philosopher ever would suggest such an idea? |
This is a recycled old I.D. argument which is prima facie false because it rests solely upon a false premise: namely, that the universe is a highly ordered item. This is probably because it is dated (1976) and contemporary mathematical and scientific theories refuting the inherent complexity and/or structured order of the universe were then poorly developed (if at all).
| quote: | | No one ever could be convinced that Stonehenge “just happened” by accident, yet atheists and agnostics expect us to believe that this highly ordered, well-designed Universe, and the complicated life it contains, “just happened.” To accept such an idea is, to use Dr. Wysong’s words, “to break stride from what is natural to believe” because the conclusion is unreasonable, unwarranted, and unsupported by the facts at hand. The cause simply is not adequate to produce the effect. |
Once again, the argument fails to justify the assertion that the Universe is "highly ordered" or "well-designed." Even if it were, it fails to demonstrate that it requires a creator. How "well designed" is our Universe anyway? If you were designing a Universe, would you create ten billion light years in every direction of empty and pointless space? No, you wouldn't. No intelligent designer would do that. The hallmark of good design isn't complexity, it is simplicity. The universe is more like an ink-blot than a realist painting. We only see organization because our minds create order out of chaos.
Finally, I'd like to address the stonehenge analogy. It is a fallacious false analogy. It is not the inherent order or complexity of stonehenge which makes it reasonable to conclude it was the result of design, but rather the smiliarity of stonehenge to known designed objects. No one has seen a universe or anything like it designed, hence the analogy is false and a poor attempt (at best) to obscure the inherent weaknesses in the I.D. argument.
| quote: | The central message of the Cosmological Argument, and the law of cause and effect upon which it is based, is this: Every material effect must have an adequate antecedent cause. The Universe is here; intelligent life is here; morality is here; love is here. What is their adequate antecedent cause? Since the effect never can precede, or be greater than the cause, it stands to reason that the Cause of life must be a living Intelligence that Itself is both moral and loving. When the Bible records, “In the beginning, God...,” it makes known to us just such a First Cause.
|
Only two brief points to be made about this:
1. The "law" of cause and effect is an unsupported prima facie assumption, and
2. Effects can in fact be greater than a cause as is clearly demonstrated by Cellular Automata Theory (not to mention everyday human life ;)).
| quote: | Originally posted by Zombie0915
Now if you want to go back to the topic. I am also one of the many people who are disobeying the christian teaching about abstinence and whatnot, there are a bunch of christian ideas that don't sit too well with me but I'm still not so sure if I should abandon the religion alltogether because of them just yet. I love my gf very much and we have sex whenever we feel the urge to do so. I believe I have been "born again" but am no longer seeking forgiveness for what I have been doing with her because I don't think that it is wrong. Some people say that once yer saved thats it and everything is forgiven, others think that if you sin and time and time again and continue to ask forgiveness, eventualy God knows that you aren't being sincere about it and he sends you to hell. Weather or not im going to hell for this(if it exists) is completely beyond me, but while I'm still here I'm going to do lotsa ing!:disbelief |
Just abandon the stupid religion altogether. What are you clinging on to? Do you want to be a hapless pawn in a struggle between forces which you can only pretend to comprehend?
There is not enough evidence of the validity of Christian dogma for a sane, rational person to believe that it can be logically established as true.
Furthermore, the Christian theology and lifestyle are so despicably at odds with the nature of man that a sane, rational person would never voluntarily choose to have faith in them.
You can be your own God, or you can be the worthless puppet of an imaginary one. I believe the choice is obvious. |
|
|
| Radagast |
| So how is it that you know what the nature of man is? |
|
|
| Arbiter |
| quote: | Originally posted by Radagast
So how is it that you know what the nature of man is? |
Man is a blank tablet which can write on itself. It's nature is self-defintion, as is the nature of all free creatures. That is because the very act of making a choice is an act of creation of self. Hence anything which can and does make choices is self-creating and self-defining. |
|
|
|
|
