Religion Thread

[Finniespin]

Also Finnie I'm sorry to say but Raptor Jesus is just your form of Worshiping God, though he may look different from another's God >:3

Aw 

Hehehe *rubs his hands while laughing very evil*

I have nothing to religion, But a JEZUS camp? you with all those kids getting their brains washed. Or that if you belive in god, your hip WIL INSTANT heal... all that is complete BULLSHIT.

kthxbai off to my school projects nao

[A.K Commando]

yay for Logical minds still functioning at 2 in the morning 

Anway What you say is right in the fact that just because a man has religion doesn't mean he should forgo Science at all...I mean look at Medieval Europe and the Catholic church...they had to get Gunpowder from the Chinese for a while there before they figured out they could make it on their own...which was after they made it into a weapon but I believe that's beside the point now.

Also this would explain early suns (depending on the area in this vast Universe that we have yet to even explore the tiniest dust particle of) but only if String Theory in itself were to be proven true since it was String theory itself that first posed the idea of these membranes, thus if String theory were to be disproven then that would mean that the weightless Gravition (which seems a bit ironic to me, a Weightless element creating a force which in itself is a form of Weight) did not pass through these Membranes to create suns but would rather have to either come together (if possiable) to form a gravitation pull in a certain area. This field of gGravity (which to me would look something like a black hole...not entirely sure why) would then attract any other atoms together until you get a sun. Also according to this theory that I have just brought up (please note I'm not sure if it would work) then that would mean that there would have to be some force that would attract these Gravitions together to form a center of mass in the first place so that they could acually stick together to begin to form the center of the sun. After that then the normal cycle would then have to take palce with Coments and asteroids being pulling in by the Gravitation field to strike the sun and add their 'nutreints' to the sun until it was fully fledged so to speak....Damn my head hurts x.x

Also Finnie completely agree with you on the instant healing, only way I'd believe in that was if I was touched by said miracle, also I think Bible Camps are for Sunday school and if your in Sunday school then your already Religious x.x

[Finniespin]

Also Finnie completely agree with you on the instant healing, only way I'd believe in that was if I was touched by said miracle, also I think Bible Camps are for Sunday school and if your in Sunday school then your already Religious x.x

What I meant is, Those kids who are like in a wierd "trance" and goes all crying dancing like its a rainbow or rain dance, kneeling and rolling over the flour, that just sickens me. Things you see on 4chan and stuff. With the guy whom got a photoshopped raptor head. Same as what they do to homeless people, only giving them food if they believe in god, and brainwash them with some bread.

[A.K Commando]

Well I'v never see that or heard about it (before you) so I can't comment and I don't go to 4chan...I prefer fchan >:3

[Dinomoto]

i should never have bumped this 

[Holy]

Atheism never said anything about matter spontaniously coming out of nowhere, it simply sais energy has always existed much like your god has always existed, and that matter is created out from energy given what einstein proved trough mathematics.

this is what some of us believe.
besides I hate both kinds of people in this thread, honestly why do any off you need to push your beliefs on the other?
so people rather than taking jabs a eachother take a chill pill and relax

I never said anything about atheism and the big bang theory... paragraphs are for separating ideas, which is why atheism is in one paragraph and science + big bang is in the other paragraph. Assumptions = bad.

Also, this is a debate thread, no one is pushing anything on anyone. If you are going to be Mr. Sensitive about the subject then this isn't your place to post.

YAAAY for a logical mind =D
but i did somewhat explain the begining of life in my other post. it is just incomplete ofcourse, seeing that m-theory is a begining theory of everything.
I am neither in no way trying to force this upon you i am just trying to counterbalace the last of what holy said, which was in basics "science shut the fuck upp, i have religion" which is not debating it is claiming.

Actually this is what debate means:

Code: [Select]

de·bate
   /dɪˈbeɪt/ Show Spelled [dih-beyt] Show IPA noun, verb, -bat·ed, -bat·ing.
–noun
1.
a discussion, as of a public question in an assembly, involving opposing viewpoints: a debate in the Senate on farm price supports.
2.
a formal contest in which the affirmative and negative sides of a proposition are advocated by opposing speakers.
3.
deliberation; consideration.
4.
Archaic . strife; contention.
–verb (used without object)
5.
to engage in argument or discussion, as in a legislative or public assembly: When we left, the men were still debating.
6.
to participate in a formal debate.
7.
to deliberate; consider: I debated with myself whether to tell them the truth or not.
8.
Obsolete . to fight; quarrel.
–verb (used with object)
9.
to argue or discuss (a question, issue, or the like), as in a legislative or public assembly: They debated the matter of free will.
10.
to dispute or disagree about: The homeowners debated the value of a road on the island.
11.
to engage in formal argumentation or disputation with (another person, group, etc.): Jones will debate Smith. Harvard will debate Princeton.
12.
to deliberate upon; consider: He debated his decision in the matter.
13.
Archaic . to contend for or over.

You made a fail attempt to summarize what I said. The proper summary would be "Most self-proclaimed atheists are posers trying to fit in with other poser atheists. God as a creator makes more sense than nothing creating everything. Science can't explain everything and is naive to attempt such a feat."

I am voicing a proposal of what I know as well as believe. That is debate. It's very closed minded of you to consider only people who agree with what you agree with logical.

M-string theory could potentially be correct, however, there is no substantial evidence to support or contest it. In this instance it should not be discounted. In the same respect, God should has no substantial evidence to support or contest Him other than the bible. This being said, God should not be discounted. It is closed-minded to discount anything without proof.

I have nothing to religion, But a JEZUS camp? you with all those kids getting their brains washed. Or that if you belive in god, your hip WIL INSTANT heal... all that is complete BULLSHIT.

Perfect example of closed-minded mentality. You don't actually know if it is real or not, you simply assume so you can be content with yourself, thinking you have found an answer. There is most definitely a possibility of injures being healed. My grandfather had sleep apnea. Those of intelligence would know that medical science would claim that "had sleep apnea" is impossible since it is for life. My grandfather suffered from sleep apnea for his whole life and one night stopped breathing in his sleep. He felt himself shaking, however my grandmother claims his body was still the whole time as she was pounding on his chest for dear life to save him. As my grandfather was dying, he saw himself ascend 30 feet over his house, through roof and all. He felt himself get thrown back into his body. Ever since that night, he never had sleep apnea again. God took His sleep apnea away.

[Jorgen]

yay for Logical minds still functioning at 2 in the morning 

Anway What you say is right in the fact that just because a man has religion doesn't mean he should forgo Science at all...I mean look at Medieval Europe and the Catholic church...they had to get Gunpowder from the Chinese for a while there before they figured out they could make it on their own...which was after they made it into a weapon but I believe that's beside the point now.

Also this would explain early suns (depending on the area in this vast Universe that we have yet to even explore the tiniest dust particle of) but only if String Theory in itself were to be proven true since it was String theory itself that first posed the idea of these membranes, thus if String theory were to be disproven then that would mean that the weightless Gravition (which seems a bit ironic to me, a Weightless element creating a force which in itself is a form of Weight) did not pass through these Membranes to create suns but would rather have to either come together (if possiable) to form a gravitation pull in a certain area. This field of gGravity (which to me would look something like a black hole...not entirely sure why) would then attract any other atoms together until you get a sun. Also according to this theory that I have just brought up (please note I'm not sure if it would work) then that would mean that there would have to be some force that would attract these Gravitions together to form a center of mass in the first place so that they could acually stick together to begin to form the center of the sun. After that then the normal cycle would then have to take palce with Coments and asteroids being pulling in by the Gravitation field to strike the sun and add their 'nutreints' to the sun until it was fully fledged so to speak....Damn my head hurts x.x

Also Finnie completely agree with you on the instant healing, only way I'd believe in that was if I was touched by said miracle, also I think Bible Camps are for Sunday school and if your in Sunday school then your already Religious x.x

actually what i said about gravitons were they are a part of a atom, so if the a bunch of hydrogen atoms colect in a fog of hydrogen they will be trapped in a gravitational pull creating fusion, this in terms create the early suns.
i will answear holy separatly

[Jorgen]

Atheism never said anything about matter spontaniously coming out of nowhere, it simply sais energy has always existed much like your god has always existed, and that matter is created out from energy given what einstein proved trough mathematics.

this is what some of us believe.
besides I hate both kinds of people in this thread, honestly why do any off you need to push your beliefs on the other?
so people rather than taking jabs a eachother take a chill pill and relax

I never said anything about atheism and the big bang theory... paragraphs are for separating ideas, which is why atheism is in one paragraph and science + big bang is in the other paragraph. Assumptions = bad.

Also, this is a debate thread, no one is pushing anything on anyone. If you are going to be Mr. Sensitive about the subject then this isn't your place to post.

YAAAY for a logical mind =D
but i did somewhat explain the begining of life in my other post. it is just incomplete ofcourse, seeing that m-theory is a begining theory of everything.
I am neither in no way trying to force this upon you i am just trying to counterbalace the last of what holy said, which was in basics "science shut the fuck upp, i have religion" which is not debating it is claiming.

Actually this is what debate means:

Code: [Select]

de·bate
   /dɪˈbeɪt/ Show Spelled [dih-beyt] Show IPA noun, verb, -bat·ed, -bat·ing.
–noun
1.
a discussion, as of a public question in an assembly, involving opposing viewpoints: a debate in the Senate on farm price supports.
2.
a formal contest in which the affirmative and negative sides of a proposition are advocated by opposing speakers.
3.
deliberation; consideration.
4.
Archaic . strife; contention.
–verb (used without object)
5.
to engage in argument or discussion, as in a legislative or public assembly: When we left, the men were still debating.
6.
to participate in a formal debate.
7.
to deliberate; consider: I debated with myself whether to tell them the truth or not.
8.
Obsolete . to fight; quarrel.
–verb (used with object)
9.
to argue or discuss (a question, issue, or the like), as in a legislative or public assembly: They debated the matter of free will.
10.
to dispute or disagree about: The homeowners debated the value of a road on the island.
11.
to engage in formal argumentation or disputation with (another person, group, etc.): Jones will debate Smith. Harvard will debate Princeton.
12.
to deliberate upon; consider: He debated his decision in the matter.
13.
Archaic . to contend for or over.

You made a fail attempt to summarize what I said. The proper summary would be "Most self-proclaimed atheists are posers trying to fit in with other poser atheists. God as a creator makes more sense than nothing creating everything. Science can't explain everything and is naive to attempt such a feat."

I am voicing a proposal of what I know as well as believe. That is debate. It's very closed minded of you to consider only people who agree with what you agree with logical.

M-string theory could potentially be correct, however, there is no substantial evidence to support or contest it. In this instance it should not be discounted. In the same respect, God should has no substantial evidence to support or contest Him other than the bible. This being said, God should not be discounted. It is closed-minded to discount anything without proof.

I have nothing to religion, But a JEZUS camp? you with all those kids getting their brains washed. Or that if you belive in god, your hip WIL INSTANT heal... all that is complete BULLSHIT.

Perfect example of closed-minded mentality. You don't actually know if it is real or not, you simply assume so you can be content with yourself, thinking you have found an answer. There is most definitely a possibility of injures being healed. My grandfather had sleep apnea. Those of intelligence would know that medical science would claim that "had sleep apnea" is impossible since it is for life. My grandfather suffered from sleep apnea for his whole life and one night stopped breathing in his sleep. He felt himself shaking, however my grandmother claims his body was still the whole time as she was pounding on his chest for dear life to save him. As my grandfather was dying, he saw himself ascend 30 feet over his house, through roof and all. He felt himself get thrown back into his body. Ever since that night, he never had sleep apnea again. God took His sleep apnea away.

this all has to do with perception. A word will never have a complete meaning, it depends on how you say it.

besides, it is an exchange of thoughts yes, it is not a debate if i do not see any other opinion than my own and just say something like "science is useless, religion is the only way". however you say that doesn't really matter in my opinion, if you are going to force an opinion and not listen to other options, a debate would never work.

no matter what wikipedia might say, this is social interaction which lets just say is defined mostly my common norms in a specific group rather than one view only. basically what i am saying is that, it will be different where ever you go how you will discuss with some1. 

i should most likely not have taken your whole post into my quote, i actualy only talked about your last part.

also i don't know where you got the part that i hate religion from, because in fact i was a Christian until 1 year ago. but the way you talked about science in your latter part (previous post) just made me do the same thing just the other way.

anyways i might go in more detail and also bring your previous racism thread into this, with the social interaction vs wikipedia thing. Social interaction makes things different from place to place. so yes, do take in consideration that your close friends do not have the same discussion pattern as the rest of the world.

[Dinomoto]

 

[Finniespin]

My brains just got exploded...

[Raunky]

Fuck gravitons, Isaac Newton is where it's at.

[crypto]

God, not bound by time or space, making the universe makes WAY more sense than matter creating itself from nothing, which is impossible according to science... oo I see a contradiction. Nice fail at trying to explain our existence science. Silly naive science will never be able to explain everything. It should stick to numbers and building blocks.

Science is by definition skeptical about everything, demanding proof for everything. By definition, "naive" directly and completely clashes with the entire concept of science. Evidently you don't even know what science is, so you should just shut up and educate yourself on premises understood by your average nine-year-old and I shouldn't even bother to answer you, but I'll bite anyway.

On to the good stuff. From the dawn of recorded history gods have been used to explain phenomena not yet explained by science. Over the last millennium or two, scientific advances have explained more and more phenomena and use of God, or gods, as a means of explanation has gone into drastic decline. Your argument abuses a huge, huge, huge logical fallacy:

>Science may or may not be able to explain natural phenomena w, x, y, and z
>Science and God* are the only possible explanations of any given natural phenomenon
>We know that science explains w, x, and y
>Previously, our understanding of science lacked the capacity to explain w, x, and y
>>Currently, our understanding of science has the capacity to explain w, x, and y
>>>Currently, we know that science explains w, x, and y
>Currently, our understanding of science lacks the capacity to explain z
>>In the future, our understanding of science may or may not gain the capacity to explain z
>>>In the future, we may or may not know that science explains z
>>>>Currently, it is impossible for us to know whether or not science explains z
>>>>Currently, it is impossible for us to know whether or not God explains z

* God being shorthand for whatever supreme entity tickles your fancy.

We cannot know with absolute certainty whether or not science are will ever explain z, ergo we cannot eliminate science as an option, ergo faith is not the logically superior option (i.e., it makes no more sense than science), ergo your stance that God explains z is purely a preference, ergo Nicolas Cage deserves to die in a goddamn fire.

[crypto]

Come to think of it, not on only is your stance an illogical preference, but inductive reasoning says that it's extremely unlikely that God and not science is the correct explanation.

You don't actually know if it is real or not, you simply assume so you can be content with yourself, thinking you have found an answer.

Standard procedure—and by golly is this a shocker!—is to disbelieve something that you don't know is real. Answer me this, Holy: Why do you believe in the Christian God instead of Allah or karma or nature spirits or the Flying Spaghetti Monster or any other deity or supernatural force that's ever been dreamed up in the two hundred thousand years since anatomically modern humans showed up?

And it's ridiculously hypocritical and irrational to moronic proportions that people who have blind faith in something, by definition being unable to prove it, expect people who do not have blind faith to prove them wrong. Guess what, fuckers: A theory is impossible to disprove until it is proven. You have a hypothesis (untested and unproven), not a theory (proven). We have no obligation whatsoever to ignore your randomly preferred superstitions.

[Finniespin]

Triple post

Just modify that first post >_>

[crypto]

Semi-fixed. It wouldn't register two block quotes in one post. And what the hell difference does it make to you?