|
lol @ christianity (pg. 17)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| lex400sc |
| quote: | Originally posted by weymouth
I believe in intelligent design. A greater being makes infinite more sense to me than inorganic matter turning into organic matter or the major problems in the Big Bang Theory. |
a primordial stew forming ribonucleic acid with the application of heat has been emulated in labs already. it's not impossible to create organic matter out of no organic matter... especially when you have something as inconcievably vast and innumerable as the UNIVERSE an experiment... |
|
|
| stevieboy32808 |
| quote: | Originally posted by lex400sc
it's simple human psychology... the less you know about something the more mythology you make up in its place... at least at the societal level. look at every other "hip" religion of it's time that came and went... the romans: didn't know about such uncontrollable concepts as love, war, the sun, the moon, the sky, the stars, comets, the oceans, thunder & lightening, etc etc etc... so in order to help them cope with such things they personified them into deities because it's much easier to deal with something that has a human face, a name and an agenda for you to work with. you can't explain a massive storm that destroys your town, well if you can't explain it then you live in perpetual fear that it can happen again and again and again at any moment. who needs the stress? so you rationalize it as an angry god and attempt to appease him. well the more science taught humanity, the fewer gods we needed to help cope with the meathook realities of life. ultimately what are we left with today? what don't we understand and probably never will? what happens after you die. it's so grim to think you just decompose like everything else in nature, so we created a soul, a loving god, an epic and poetic struggle between good and evil, ten commandments, stories of sacrifice, stories of miracle and hope, a universe that was made just for us. such a romantic tale, and i'm sure it helped millions of people cope with the pain and suffering of plagues and famine and wars, but in the end it's just false hopes. religion impedes the progress of humanity by asserting that all the important questions of origin are already known. well not that i really care what the hell anyone believes. i've accepted that free-thinkers will always be the minority and people will continue to believe simply because it's the EASIEST thing to do. |
I love this post, but could you please tell me the basis of this argument. For example, where did you get your sources from? As much I want to believe you, I need to know where that came from because I'd certainly love to learn more about what you said. |
|
|
| Orbax |
I find it odd that one would complain about America's use of religion when thats pretty much why it started. They werent boats of atheists out to make an atheist haven, it was to make their own country, under God. I'm just glad we can actually talk about it here, whereas in other places in the globe you could just be killed for not believing in God.
Try to have a little bit broader of a perspective on that which youre allowed to bitch about.
and lex, the idea of sources is to make you look like less of a jackass. I, and others, have been philosophizing. That means we are having a ghostly "I believe" prefixing our posts.
You, on the other hand, have come off as an unmitigated jackass making up words like "fallicious" (You must have been eating something tasty at the time) in the attempt to not debate, to not argue, to not prove anything other than the fact that you're right. Right about what? We don't know, because you won't actually say what your point is. If there is one.
You ridicule others for their belief systems when you can barely grunt out the few stirrings in your mind that resemble your wildly unfounded opinions. You obviously don't read or your vocabulary and spelling would be better, so where you have obtained the information that you are basing your *beliefs* on, I have no clue.
If you are, as you said, not proving anything or trying to make a point, why are you posting? Are you making a tacit admission to the fact that you're just rambling? |
|
|
| UWM |
| quote: | Originally posted by lex400sc
a primordial stew forming ribonucleic acid with the application of heat has been emulated in labs already. it's not impossible to create organic matter out of no organic matter... especially when you have something as inconcievably vast and innumerable as the UNIVERSE an experiment... |
And when you have an inconceivably vast amount of time (BILLIONS OF YEARS) over which this event can take place. |
|
|
| Orbax |
| quote: | Originally posted by lex400sc
a primordial stew forming ribonucleic acid with the application of heat has been emulated in labs already. it's not impossible to create organic matter out of no organic matter... especially when you have something as inconcievably vast and innumerable as the UNIVERSE an experiment... |
that reminds me of the story of the scientists who told God they didnt need him any more. They said they had figured out how to create life from dirt. So He said go for it, lets prove that I am no longer needed once and for all.
So they began to gather all their supplies, they set up their equipment, and they were about to add the first protein to the soil when God broke in and said "whoa whoa whoa make your own dirt"
Point: Once youve explained how something came from nothing or has always existed (and if you can explain Time in the sense of the measure of decay and whether or not it existed before matter) you might have some ground to stand on. But for now, you have explained A beginning, which is not that complex.
Explain the hard stuff, because its like you know...2006 and we all are pretty edumuhcated these days in evolutionary theory. |
|
|
| Sunsnail |
| quote: | Originally posted by Orbax
that reminds me of the story of the scientists who told God they didnt need him any more. They said they had figured out how to create life from dirt. So He said go for it, lets prove that I am no longer needed once and for all.
So they began to gather all their supplies, they set up their equipment, and they were about to add the first protein to the soil when God broke in and said "whoa whoa whoa make your own dirt"
Point: Once youve explained how something came from nothing or has always existed (and if you can explain Time in the sense of the measure of decay and whether or not it existed before matter) you might have some ground to stand on. But for now, you have explained A beginning, which is not that complex.
Explain the hard stuff, because its like you know...2006 and we all are pretty edumuhcated these days in evolutionary theory. |
Who says the universe had a beginning necessarily? |
|
|
| Orbax |
| quote: | Originally posted by Sunsnail
Who says the universe had a beginning necessarily? |
science
and thats why i stipulated the "always" clause |
|
|
| Renegade |
| quote: | Originally posted by Orbax
Point: Once youve explained how something came from nothing or has always existed (and if you can explain Time in the sense of the measure of decay and whether or not it existed before matter) you might have some ground to stand on. But for now, you have explained A beginning, which is not that complex. |
It makes no sense to say that something as simple as the universe cannot exist ex nihilo but that something as complex as God can. If God can exist without a creator, why wouldn't we minimise pluralities (Ockham's Razor, bitches!) and suggest that the universe can too?
| quote: | | Explain the hard stuff, because its like you know...2006 and we all are pretty edumuhcated these days in evolutionary theory. |
What do the origins of the universe have to do with evolutionary theory? Why would a scientific inability to fully and presently explain the "complex" origins of the universe mean that an answer which doesn't involve God isn't there? How does scientific ignorance lend any credibility to the theory of an omnipotent, omnibenevolent, transcendently incorporeal being? |
|
|
| Orbax |
| quote: | Originally posted by Renegade
It makes no sense to say that something as simple as the universe cannot exist ex nihilo but that something as complex as God can. If God can exist without a creator, why wouldn't we minimise pluralities (Ockham's Razor, bitches!) and suggest that the universe can too?
What do the origins of the universe have to do with evolutionary theory? Why would a scientific inability to fully and presently explain the "complex" origins of the universe mean that an answer which doesn't involve God isn't there? How does scientific ignorance lend any credibility to the theory of an omnipotent, omnibenevolent, transcendently incorporeal being? |
The first part you responded to was to make him stop talking and I was getting away from evolutionary theory as its pretty much proven at this point that evolution exists therefore its kind of pointless to use evolution to blow peoples minds. |
|
|
| Orbax |
Also, really wasn't trying to make this a debate on whether or not God exists. The objective earlier was to find out what was motivating people to believe what they were believing. It was out of interest more than trying to prove some vague notion of inherent properties of Cosmic Awareness.
Its wildly futile to try to prove or disprove God; on paper or to people. Knowing that its an issue that will not be resolved, talking about personal experiences that have led people down the path to where they are now is more interesting and has the upside of it being indisputable.
It is sometimes nice to get perspectives that are not yours about things that have come up in your life and maybe change and grow and learn a bit.
Theres always gotta be one guy who flips out though hehe. No religious discussion is official until you get the fanatics in there. |
|
|
| iammesol |
The bashing in this thread has the potential to be more hardcore than a Tiesto thread. :nervous:
All I can say to the non-believers here is... If Christians are right... you're screwed. |
|
|
| djmetatron |
| quote: | Originally posted by Orbax
You, on the other hand, have come off as an unmitigated jackass making up words like "fallicious" (You must have been eating something tasty at the time) in the attempt to not debate, to not argue, to not prove anything other than the fact that you're right. Right about what? We don't know, because you won't actually say what your point is. If there is one.
You ridicule others for their belief systems when you can barely grunt out the few stirrings in your mind that resemble your wildly unfounded opinions. You obviously don't read or your vocabulary and spelling would be better, so where you have obtained the information that you are basing your *beliefs* on, I have no clue.
If you are, as you said, not proving anything or trying to make a point, why are you posting? Are you making a tacit admission to the fact that you're just rambling? |
his spelling and grammar may not be great and he may not have cited a bunch of sources (it's f-ing silly to expect him to in the cor) and he may even have been rambling a bit..
but his points are there.
you on the other hand have mostly been nitpicking at his posts, asking for sources and calling him a jackass trying to break him down.
i really don't mean this as an insult to you but it would be nice to have a two-way debate on the issue.
really the main thing that lex was saying and what those books i posted were about was that the desire for religion, and more specifically an explanation of the unknown, is a natural human instinct. it comes from a need to explain the unknown because we are afraid of it.
and this point brings about a greater point that i would like to emphasize: religion and God theories result from human fear while scientific theory results from observation and 'best guess' attempts.
the scientific theories such as evolution and 'the big bang', while not being bullet-proof, are obtained from a more objective approach. whereas religion and god is actually a biased approach because of human genetics. |
|
|
|
|
