Manwell Pablo Posted 30 January 2013 Posted 30 January 2013 Who said he was omnipotent? or all powerful? you only have the word of man on that, and as has already been proved the word of man cannot be trusted. God could be many things, from the creator to the shepherd, to bringer of death or giver of life and love, the fact that religious texts have clearly got it wrong, whether it be through deliberate lies or lost in translation or Chinese whispers does not prove or disprove the presence of god only the inaccuracy of these texts. Jesus christ. (EDIT: no pun intended) You just keep changing your position in the arguement slightly after every post in order to carry on disagreeing! Stick to your guns or give it up!
The Doctor Posted 30 January 2013 Posted 30 January 2013 Let's just take a minute to really think about the monumental absurdity of the idea of an Abrahamic god - the creator of the universe who watches over all 7 billion of us at all times and is really interested in who we sleep with. He's supposed to have made the universe with us in mind, even though we are confined to living on only parts of only the crust of only one of planets in but one of the solar systems in only one of the hundreds of billions of galaxies he bothered making. He apparently wanted to give us a message, so he thought the best thing to do would be to tell a few shepherds in the arse-end of nowhere in the Middle East in the Bronze Age, and then just leave it at that. I really don't know where to start with this. Honestly, if you can believe in something like this, then I fear for your sanity. If I tell you I've got an invisible friend, the very least I'm going to expect is a few laughs. Seems like a decent chance to slip this in:
Captain... Posted 30 January 2013 Posted 30 January 2013 Tedious question Yes you are totally correct I believe there is no God so therefore, all of which you have just put is irrelevant. And if there is one he is done an increadible job of creating an extremly cruel world, and the bible is his book then it is one of the most damming biographies ever written and if god is real and all of his teachings have been misinterpretated and the result is the Chirstian religion that makes that religion little more than a lie anyway and pointless following. There wasn't a question, so I'm not sure what you find tedious, I completely agree with your last statement, that is why I follow no religion, but I also don't dismiss the possibility that there have been external factors in our development as living conscious beings, self aware creatures capable of abstract thought, factors which we currently don't comprehend and understand and can not be explained by science. Jesus christ. (EDIT: no pun intended) You just keep changing your position in the arguement slightly after every post in order to carry on disagreeing! Stick to your guns or give it up! I have not changed anything, you just think that because I disagree with you, I must have diametrically opposite opinions. I will make it clear I don't follow any religious texts, I don't hold any stock in any organised religions, except Buddhism and that is more of a passing interest rather than devout following, I don't believe in any specific god, but I don't concede that we know everything that there is to now about this world and the next, and in that grey area there is the possibility for gods, supernatural beings, external influences, not as we know or understand them now, and dismiss all these possibilities is as backwards as believing any specific religion out right.
Manwell Pablo Posted 30 January 2013 Posted 30 January 2013 There wasn't a question, so I'm not sure what you find tedious, I completely agree with your last statement, that is why I follow no religion, but I also don't dismiss the possibility that there have been external factors in our development as living conscious beings, self aware creatures capable of abstract thought, factors which we currently don't comprehend and understand and can not be explained by science. I have not changed anything, you just think that because I disagree with you, I must have diametrically opposite opinions. I will make it clear I don't follow any religious texts, I don't hold any stock in any organised religions, except Buddhism, I don't believe in any specific god, but I don't concede that we know everything that there is to now about this world, and in that grey area there is the possibility for gods, supernatural beings, external influences, not as we know or understand them now, and dismiss all these possibilities is as backwards as believing any specific religion out right. Yes and if you fvcking remember, you've moved it on to this with your continual changing positions! This is not what was being discussed 3 fvcking pages ago was it? I am not dismissing the belief of "a god" although I find the the possability about as likely as Men In Blacks explanation of the universe or any number of infinite explanations that we do and do not understand. To drag you back into what I am saying, organised religion (the ones revolving around invisible men in the sky) on this planet. is incorrect, and causes more harm than good. You can tell it's incorrect, by looking at what is written in it's books. And if these books are so incorrect due to things being lost in translation or whatever, but the god in question is still out there, it makes the whole religion a lie and not worth following.
Captain... Posted 30 January 2013 Posted 30 January 2013 Yes and if you fvcking remember, you've moved it on to this with your continual changing positions! This is not what was being discussed 3 fvcking pages ago was it? I am not dismissing the belief of "a god" although I find the the possability about as likely as Men In Blacks explanation of the universe or any number of infinite explanations that we do and do not understand. To drag you back into what I am saying, organised religion (the ones revolving around invisible men in the sky) on this planet. is incorrect, and causes more harm than good. You can tell it's incorrect, by looking at what is written in it's books. And if these books are so incorrect due to things being lost in translation or whatever, but the god in question is still out there, it makes the whole religion a lie and not worth following. And as I said this is the fault of man and not of religions, religious beliefs or any gods real or imagined. But you, being as stubborn as I am, refuse to accept this point.
Manwell Pablo Posted 30 January 2013 Posted 30 January 2013 And as I said this is the fault of man and not of religions, religious beliefs or any gods real or imagined. But you, being as stubborn as I am, refuse to accept this point. As it's is fundementally flawed! As has been said, if the word of god has been misinterpretated that badly surely a all-powerful being should probably step in and point that out! And if he isn't all powerful, the whole religion can't be true as the fact that he is all powerful is the core of it! He created the world, destroyed citys, flooded the entire world and had his own son born by to a virgin before letting him be executed, bringing him back to life and zapping him back up to heaven! That's quite a lot to misinterpretate!
Rincewind Posted 30 January 2013 Posted 30 January 2013 Quite simple. Man thinks. Seeks information. Questions existence. Finds it impossible. Children ask. Give simple answer God did it. Centuries pass. Man lcurious. Man learns. Man studies. Child asks question. Simple man answers God did it. If we have to have a God why cannot it be nature and the wonders of the universe? Call the Big Bang God if you like. It is just another word. Or even make God a woman and call her Mother Nature. Why believe there are faries at the bottom of the garden when the garden is beautiful without?
Captain... Posted 30 January 2013 Posted 30 January 2013 As it's is fundementally flawed! As has been said, if the word of god has been misinterpretated that badly surely a all-powerful being should probably step in and point that out! And if he isn't all powerful, the whole religion can't be true as the fact that he is all powerful is the core of it! He created the world, destroyed citys, flooded the entire world and had his own son born by to a virgin before letting him be executed, bringing him back to life and zapping him back up to heaven! That's quite a lot to misinterpretate! You are saying he is all powerful not me, and I am not talking about Christianity or any of its many sub sects, I am talking about religion as a whole, which often gets blamed, but the problem is not religion, nor god, not even organised religions it is man, man is greedy, lazy, weak and cowardly, man committed all of those atrocities not god, nor religion, they may have been done in their name, but if I kill you in god's name I get punished not god. Blaming religion for these wars is just as delusional as doing something in religion's name, if there was no religion then man would find other excuses, other justifications for brutal oppressive behaviour.
Manwell Pablo Posted 30 January 2013 Posted 30 January 2013 You are saying he is all powerful not me, and I am not talking about Christianity or any of its many sub sects, I am talking about religion as a whole, which often gets blamed, but the problem is not religion, nor god, not even organised religions it is man, man is greedy, lazy, weak and cowardly, man committed all of those atrocities not god, nor religion, they may have been done in their name, but if I kill you in god's name I get punished not god. Blaming religion for these wars is just as delusional as doing something in religion's name, if there was no religion then man would find other excuses, other justifications for brutal oppressive behaviour. So if there was no religion what reason would people have for sending Neil Lennon bombs in the post? Why woud Ireland still be split after years of war and death? What reason would there be for burning Protestant/Catholics for no other reason than not following the state religion? What reason would there be for the French Religious wars or thirty years war? Why would Bin Laden have someone fly a plane into the twin towers? Why would science of been held back if it were not for the church commanding that that be the case?
leicsmac Posted 30 January 2013 Posted 30 January 2013 So if there was no religion what reason would people have for sending Neil Lennon bombs in the post? Why woud Ireland still be split after years of war and death? What reason would there be for burning Protestant/Catholics for no other reason than not following the state religion? What reason would there be for the French Religious wars or thirty years war? Why would Bin Laden have someone fly a plane into the twin towers? Why would science of been held back if it were not for the church commanding that that be the case? People did these things. People who had read, misinterpreted and perverted texts written and coalesced into a structure by other people. All of those things were people...Just. Being. People.
Captain... Posted 30 January 2013 Posted 30 January 2013 So if there was no religion what reason would people have for sending Neil Lennon bombs in the post? Why woud Ireland still be split after years of war and death? What reason would there be for burning Protestant/Catholics for no other reason than not following the state religion? What reason would there be for the French Religious wars or thirty years war? Why would Bin Laden have someone fly a plane into the twin towers? Why would science of been held back if it were not for the church commanding that that be the case? There would be different problems, but there would still be conflict and violence, and aggression and power struggles, and there would be other reasons for it, money, power, politics, ideology (eg Communism vs Capitalism) but the motives would still be the same, fear, greed, power. Removing religion from the world without addressing the core problems with mankind would not make one jot of difference things like slavery, racism, sexism, rape, murder, war, famine, disease would all still exist. It may be to a greater or a lesser extent, but religion is just an excuse, and removing it would just give rise to another excuse.
BoneDog Posted 30 January 2013 Posted 30 January 2013 I've not caught up with the last 10 pages yet. Sorry about that fans Having seen this page I can see it's going to be hard work, and that is why I try not to bother much anymore. Always get sucked in though when I have a peep. Let's just take a minute to really think about the monumental absurdity of the idea of an Abrahamic god - the creator of the universe who watches over all 7 billion of us at all times and is really interested in who we sleep with. That's not really how it is. But even if it were, watching over us is very possible. You cannot prove otherwise, so science has no answer on the matter. I have created things and I watch over plenty of things, and I'm just a mere speck on a small planet. These arguements are silly and not really anything to do with religion or science. He's supposed to have made the universe with us in mind. Who told you that? ...even though we are confined to living on only parts of only the crust of only one of planets in but one of the solar systems in only one of the hundreds of billions of galaxies he bothered making. Religion teaches us that there are many worlds with lots of life on them. Islam, for example says that there are 18,000 or more worlds, all with lifeforms on them. He apparently wanted to give us a message, so he thought the best thing to do would be to tell a few shepherds in the arse-end of nowhere in the Middle East in the Bronze Age, and then just leave it at that. I really don't know where to start with this You wouldn't know where to start as you have no understanding of the matter. How many religious texts have you studied? I think that you scientists are just a bit jealous of God because you have no clue how to even make a flipping tree or a sheep, let alone the millions of other complex things. All you can do is observe them and try to figure out how they were created. (yes this last sentence mat be a bit silly, but it's just as valid as some of your lots points on religion)
Manwell Pablo Posted 30 January 2013 Posted 30 January 2013 There would be different problems, but there would still be conflict and violence, and aggression and power struggles, and there would be other reasons for it, money, power, politics, ideology (eg Communism vs Capitalism) but the motives would still be the same, fear, greed, power. Removing religion from the world without addressing the core problems with mankind would not make one jot of difference things like slavery, racism, sexism, rape, murder, war, famine, disease would all still exist. It may be to a greater or a lesser extent, but religion is just an excuse, and removing it would just give rise to another excuse. I am not saying it would solve everything you clown, it's not of case of "there would be different problems" there were different problems (although of all those motives for violence I think doing it in the name of a man in the sky is the least creadible anyway)there always will be. However, the removal of relgion from history would have saved a lot of suffering, war, and the impeading of advancing science. It is inarguable to say otherwise.
Manwell Pablo Posted 30 January 2013 Posted 30 January 2013 People did these things. People who had read, misinterpreted and perverted texts written and coalesced into a structure by other people. All of those things were people...Just. Being. People. But youor not answering the question. What reason would they have for doing it if not for religion.
BoneDog Posted 30 January 2013 Posted 30 January 2013 Quite simple. Man thinks. Seeks information. Questions existence. Finds it impossible. Children ask. Give simple answer God did it. Centuries pass. Man lcurious. Man learns. Man studies. Child asks question. Simple man answers God did it. If we have to have a God why cannot it be nature and the wonders of the universe? Call the Big Bang God if you like. It is just another word. Or even make God a woman and call her Mother Nature. Why believe there are faries at the bottom of the garden when the garden is beautiful without? I plus oned this post by accident before anyone wonders why. No offence Ken but meant to press quote. In reply to the bold part, I call God a scientist and mathematician. It's obvious he is one, which is why I find it astounding that some scientists are so against the idea of a designer, and also get so upset about the subject. Modern science seems to show a programmer, and everything is full of code. Luckily some scientists are aware of this, but they are up against a dictatorial establishment so have a tough job on their hands even getting a debate about it.
Webbo Posted 30 January 2013 Posted 30 January 2013 So if there was no religion what reason would people have for sending Neil Lennon bombs in the post? Why woud Ireland still be split after years of war and death? What reason would there be for burning Protestant/Catholics for no other reason than not following the state religion? Generally speaking. 400 years ago protestant Britain annexed catholic Ireland, therefore catholic Irish, protestant British Therefore catholics resent protestant British and don't won't to be ruled from London, protestants want to stay loyal to Britain and don't want to be ruled from Dublin. It has very little, if anything, to do with religion.
Manwell Pablo Posted 30 January 2013 Posted 30 January 2013 Generally speaking. 400 years ago protestant Britain annexed catholic Ireland, therefore catholic Irish, protestant British Therefore catholics resent protestant British and don't won't to be ruled from London, protestants want to stay loyal to Britain and don't want to be ruled from Dublin. It has very little, if anything, to do with religion.
BoneDog Posted 30 January 2013 Posted 30 January 2013 But youor not answering the question. What reason would they have for doing it if not for religion. Many of the things you say about the problems of the past, and religion causing them are not correct. The inquisitions for example were not the work of any religion. Gangsters took over a religion and persecuted real religious people. Jews, Christians, Muslims and others were victims of the inquisition. Religion and it's people have always been persecuted, and are not the persecutors - starting from getting thrown to the lions by the Romans, right up to modern days. I was going to post about this subject but haven't got round to it yet.
Manwell Pablo Posted 30 January 2013 Posted 30 January 2013 Many of the things you say about the problems of the past, and religion causing them are not correct. The inquisitions for example were not the work of any religion. Gangsters took over a religion and persecuted real religious people. Jews, Christians, Muslims and others were victims of the inquisition. Religion and it's people have always been persecuted, and are not the persecutors - starting from getting thrown to the lions by the Romans, right up to modern days. I was going to post about this subject but haven't got round to it yet. Thing is about my point, it works in reverse as well. If there is no religion. There is no holocaust, amongst other religious purges.
Manwell Pablo Posted 30 January 2013 Posted 30 January 2013 What's funny? That fact that you think that the problems in Ireland have nothing to do with religion.
leicsmac Posted 30 January 2013 Posted 30 January 2013 But youor not answering the question. What reason would they have for doing it if not for religion. Mao and Stalin did it for the 'Good of the State'. Pol Pot did it as a 'social revolution'. The Kim family in North Korea still do it as a 'cult of personality'. Mengele at Auschwitz and Unit 731 in Japan/China did it in the name of 'scientific experimentation'. The Nazi Party did it in the name of 'racial purification'. My point is religion is just one justification of many that humans use to carry out inhuman acts to their fellow man. And that the demise of religion would not necessarily lead to less acts of inhumanity, as humans would merely seek another justification. I'll say it again - religion is just a tool that people use, either for good or bad.
Manwell Pablo Posted 30 January 2013 Posted 30 January 2013 Mao and Stalin did it for the 'Good of the State'. Pol Pot did it as a 'social revolution'. The Kim family in North Korea still do it as a 'cult of personality'. Mengele at Auschwitz and Unit 731 in Japan/China did it in the name of 'scientific experimentation'. The Nazi Party did it in the name of 'racial purification'. My point is religion is just one justification of many that humans use to carry out inhuman acts to their fellow man. And that the demise of religion would not necessarily lead to less acts of inhumanity, as humans would merely seek another justification. I'll say it again - religion is just a tool that people use, either for good or bad. I'm not repeating myself again so please read up.
Webbo Posted 30 January 2013 Posted 30 January 2013 That fact that you think that the problems in Ireland have nothing to do with religion. It's nationalism versus loyalism, it just happens that most nationalist are catholics and most loyalists are protestant.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.