There Is No God
It's funny, I asked the "upper" Christians way back when I was a Christian, "If Jesus turned water into wine then why are we not allowed to drink?" "Oh, well way back then wine was very, very weak, it wasn't like how it is today."Quote: rxwine...Jesus had a hardy liver apparently.
I am just amazed that there are Christians who I knew from 15 years ago who are probably still trudging along, touting the Bible as the truth. I mean, it took me four years to figure out that it was all b.s., but those who keep going throughout their lives thinking that way are just such an enigma to me. Hasn't the study of psychology come far enough where we can have some pretty firm conclusions on why humans think and do such wild and crazy things?
Human psychology has always been an interest of mine. I find myself recently struggling with thoughts that tell me to do this or not do that ("come on, you can cheat on our diet just one more day. you deserve to treat yourself" as an example) and I'm amazed at the inner struggle that my mind seems to constantly deal with. And the eating thing is just an example, but I'm practicing more discipline in my life and it's funny how the convincing yet immature voice inside of me can be so damn appealing. I've been tapping into my inner strength lately a lot more than I had in the past and it does a lot for my self-esteem.
I think what you're looking for is The Thomas Jefferson Bible. Only Jefferson was a little nicer and merely edited out the crap.Quote: HotBlondeYou know how there are many different versions of the bible such as King James version and etc.? There should be a
Reality Version and when you open it up and read through it it reads: "Crap... Crap... Crap... More crap....Some kinda good stuff that I can apply in my life... Crap... Fake but entertaining story... More Crap..." and etc. etc.
That would be the easiest to read translation!
Disclaimer: Any and all negative comments towards the bible, god or believers and or anything I have said to cause any nut jobs to lose faith was for entertainment purposes only and I was just joking.
WTF wait a minute I forgot I just have to ask for forgiveness. I can Rape, molest, steal & kill if i get caught just need to ask for forgiveness and mean it. If I got caught Believe you me I would MEAN IT.
Perhaps that's why god would allow such horrible things. it may take Getting caught doing something that horrible to change ones life. That's definitely the kind of people I want in my heaven
or I wonder if forgiveness is just a way to allow people a chance back into the church to get more money?
"father forgive me for I have sinned" ALL BETTER NOW until next time
You must still pay for your sins though.
People don't understand this.
They choose to believe all will be forgiven and no payment will be due.
When Jesus was on the Cross with the two thieves, he forgave them.
They were crucified just the same.
You haven't read your bible, have you? In Matthew, Mark and John the thieves are barely mentioned and sometimes they are called rebels. You have to look in Luke to find the passage to which you're referring. Jesus didn't forgive anyone outright, he told the one thief that he will be with Jesus in heaven and didn't even address the second thief. By the way, he did that after the three of them were already crucified but before they were dead so no, they weren't "crucified just the same" since that had already happened.Quote: TankoWhen Jesus was on the Cross with the two thieves, he forgave them.
They were crucified just the same.
Tanko is now disqualified from saying things about Jesus since it's obvious that he knows nothing of the subject.
Quote: HotBlondeIt's funny, I asked the "upper" Christians way back when I was a Christian, "If Jesus turned water into wine then why are we not allowed to drink?" "Oh, well way back then wine was very, very weak, it wasn't like how it is today."
I am just amazed that there are Christians who I knew from 15 years ago who are probably still trudging along, touting the Bible as the truth. I mean, it took me four years to figure out that it was all b.s., but those who keep going throughout their lives thinking that way are just such an enigma to me. Hasn't the study of psychology come far enough where we can have some pretty firm conclusions on why humans think and do such wild and crazy things?
Human psychology has always been an interest of mine. I find myself recently struggling with thoughts that tell me to do this or not do that ("come on, you can cheat on our diet just one more day. you deserve to treat yourself" as an example) and I'm amazed at the inner struggle that my mind seems to constantly deal with. And the eating thing is just an example, but I'm practicing more discipline in my life and it's funny how the convincing yet immature voice inside of me can be so damn appealing. I've been tapping into my inner strength lately a lot more than I had in the past and it does a lot for my self-esteem.
They drank alcohol often because the water was not always safe to drink. The alcohol works as a disinfectant.
Quote: TankoSincerely ask for forgiveness and you will be forgiven.
You must still pay for your sins though.
Indeed.
So, what is the point of being forgiven "in heaven" if your sins are not absolved here "on earth?"
God forgives you, but the hangmen puts your head in the noose?!
Seems to promote cognitive dissonance.
you cant use terms like cognitive dissonance that's more painful applying to your statement.Quote: MrVIndeed.
So, what is the point of being forgiven "in heaven" if your sins are not absolved here "on earth?"
God forgives you, but the hangmen puts your head in the noose?!
Seems to promote cognitive dissonance.
Despite your tortured (pardon the pun) logic, you remain disqualified.Quote: TankoThe point is, when he said "Today you will be with me in Paradise", He Saved the thief. This is forgiveness. He never told the thief that he would join him in Heaven. They are different places. They were not crucified at that point, because they were not yet dead. At that point, they were nailed to a cross. Nailed to a cross is one thing, Crucified is dead. To be "crucified" is to be put to death by being nailed to a cross. The thief was forgiven for his sins, but he remained nailed to the cross and was crucified (died on the cross) just the same, as payment for his sins. As for not forgiving anyone outright, aside from the thief in Luke 23:43, see Matthew 9:2, 9:6. Mark 2:10. Luke 5:24
Quote: TankoThe thief was forgiven for his sins, but he remained nailed to the cross and was crucified just the same, as payment for his sins.
Thinking the whole time, jeez, that sure made a difference.
Thanks for nothing..
I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them. For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naive.
AKA Tanko
Let them alone; they are blind guides. And if the blind lead the blind, both will fall into a pit.”
But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire. as far as i can see Tanko is going to hell
Quote: HotBlondeIt's funny, I asked the "upper" Christians way back when I was a Christian, "If Jesus turned water into wine then why are we not allowed to drink?" "Oh, well way back then wine was very, very weak, it wasn't like how it is today."
There's some truth to this, actually. Not the wine itself, which if anything was stronger than it is today (like sifted flour, winemakers tried to get it as strong as humanly possible, since getting it strong enough to lose the character of wine was yet beyond them), but they didn't drink it straight. Rich Romans would mix it with ice and honey, but the poorer provincials would tend to be content to top it off with water like hard liquor in yesteryear.
Yeah, but the point I was tyring to make is that in my personal experience Christians will twist things in ways that tries to prove the things they follow. "It's a sin to drink alcohol." Really? How does that make any sense? Christians have such a fairytale way of looking at things (and remember, I used to be a Christian so I am talking from experience) and it's kinda scary that they base their whole belief system on "faith". Then we could technically have faith in anything, but that doesn't make something true.Quote: 24BingoThere's some truth to this, actually. Not the wine itself, which if anything was stronger than it is today (like sifted flour, winemakers tried to get it as strong as humanly possible, since getting it strong enough to lose the character of wine was yet beyond them), but they didn't drink it straight. Rich Romans would mix it with ice and honey, but the poorer provincials would tend to be content to top it off with water like hard liquor in yesteryear.
Quote: HotBlonde(and remember, I used to be a Christian so I am talking from experience)
Christians are famous for bashing other groups of people to make themselves feel better about their own belief system. Old habits are hard to break.
One thread of proof (to the extent that anything is provable, but that's another discussion) is answering the question of whether the cosmos is a creation. I've only bounced around this topic so I don't know if everyone's come to agreement on this issue or not.Quote: EvenBobSend proof immediately, much appreciated..
Quote:Any agnostic is free to believe that his favorite religion has not yet been completely disproven. But anyone who wishes to bring science into the argument must acknowledge that the evidence thus far is weak, especially when it is combined statistically, in the fashion of a meta-analysis. To emphasize the qualitative conclusion (X has not been absolutely proven to be false) while ignoring the collective weight of the quantitative data (i.e., that most evidence points away from X) is a fallacy, akin to holding out a belief in flying reindeer on the grounds that there could yet be sleighs that we have not yet seen.
Scientists and non-scientists alike are still free to believe whatever they want, but the grounds for religion have to be the same as they ever were: faith, not science. Science cannot absolutely prove that there is no divine creator, but the tools of science do allow us to weigh the existing evidence, and assign likelihoods to those hypotheses; by ignoring those tools, [we do] science a disservice.
Gary Marcus: Can Science Lead to Faith?
To you believing is seeing the 'being' , and because you can't see him, you believe that it is nothing... Yet there is more nothingness around you than your 'being' (I.e what you see and understand)... The nothingness around you is far greater than your being... Thus to God, you may be the nothingness to God's being...
And if one of the most popular atheists of the 20th century can say this... There's nothing more to say
OR
no God or no god: Live your life.
What is the difference?
-- Albert Camus
Quote:"God brought them out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn."—Numbers 23:22
"God brought him forth out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn."—Numbers 24:8
"His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns: with them he shall push the people together to the ends of the earth."—Deuteronomy 33:17
"Will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib? Canst thou bind the unicorn with his band in the furrow? or will he harrow the valleys after thee? Wilt thou trust him, because his strength is great? or wilt thou leave thy labour to him? Wilt thou believe him, that he will bring home thy seed, and gather it into thy barn?"—Job 39:9–12
"Save me from the lion's mouth; for thou hast heard me from the horns of unicorns."—Psalms 22:21
"He maketh them [the cedars of Lebanon] also to skip like a calf; Lebanon and Sirion like a young unicorn."—Psalms 29:6
"But my horn shalt thou exalt like the horn of the unicorn: I shall be anointed with fresh oil."—Psalms 92:10
"And the unicorns shall come down with them, and the bullocks with their bulls; and their land shall be soaked with blood, and their dust made fat with fatness."—Isaiah 34:7
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unicorn
Just having some fun.
There's too much actually wrong in Christian writings to harp on things that do have good explanations.
Quote: pewOne thread of proof (to the extent that anything is provable, but that's another discussion) is answering the question of whether the cosmos is a creation. I've only bounced around this topic so I don't know if everyone's come to agreement on this issue or not.
I believe it was created.
All mass and every form of energy is in the process of being converted irreversibly into heat energy.
deleted
Quote: Tanko
Time had to be created too.
How do you know time exists? We experience
things in a linear fashion, giving us the illusion
of time. If this is the only way we can experience
living, how do we know its the only way.
Time is a measure of change. Nothing more. That's why time slows down near the speed of light. Less change can happen because light and the electro-magnetic force conveyed by that light has to travel farther to do the same thing and since light travels at only one speed, light, less change happens.Quote: TankoTime had to be created too.
Quote:Once I saw this guy on a bridge about to jump. I said, "Don't do it!" He said, "Nobody loves me." I said, "God loves you. Do you believe in God?"
He said, "Yes." I said, "Are you a Christian or a Jew?" He said, "A Christian." I said, "Me, too! Protestant or Catholic?" He said, "Protestant." I said, "Me, too! What franchise?" He said, "Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Baptist or Southern Baptist?" He said, "Northern Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist or Northern Liberal Baptist?"
He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region, or Northern Conservative Baptist Eastern Region?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region." I said, "Me, too!"
Northern Conservative†Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1879, or Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912." I said, "Die, heretic!" And I pushed him over.
from here
Click for Biggering
and the segment that it's about:
Quote: TankoWhat are the odds of the precise amino acids necessary for life somehow all appearing together where only stone previously existed and somehow arranging themselves into a biological form?
What are the odds of that simple biological form figuring out how to replicate itself and creating the precise genes necessary to deliver the instructions for replication in a precise order?
Why did it replicate itself in the first place?
What are the odds of that simple biological form developing a way to metabolize oxygen and nutrients at the same time it was created?
The biological form had to develop all of these abilities simultaneous with its creation or it would quickly perish.
What are the odds of all of these events occurring simultaneously as they had to?
I do not know the answer to these questions.
Due to the odds against their natural occurrence, I do not discount the possibility that a supernatural force caused them to occur.
I love it. Let’s think about this for a second…
What are the odds that life could form randomly? Certainly they’re greater than one in a million, yes? One in a billion? Probably? How about one in a trillion?
Can we simple humans even grasp what one trillion means? Here’s a thought for you…
A dollar bill’s thickness measures ~0.0043 inches. A hundred of them is just .43 inches. A thousand is only 4.3, not even half a foot. But as we keep multiplying by ten, things get out of control. At 100 million, we’re up as high as commercial jets. At 100 billion, we’re looking down at the International Space Station. Once we get to 100 trillion, we’re 28 times further from the Earth than the moon
Could the chances of randomly occurring life be so high as 1 in one hundred trillion? Perhaps it is so. 100 quadrillion?! Can we even possibly fathom the idea? At what number do we start to believe that, hey, maybe there’s a chance? Quintillion?
In just our galaxy alone, there are 100 billion to 1 trillion stars. We’re already reaching the limits of imagination to picture just our backyard. In those 100 billion stars, how many planets circle them? 2? 5? 10? 20? See how fast the numbers are getting out of control?
Now think of this; in just the observable universe, there are an estimated 300 septillion stars. That’s 300,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. That’s 50 TRILLION times 6 BILLION. Can you even imagine such a number? 50 trillion is the approximate number of cells in one human body. 6 billion is the approximate number of humans on the planet. And each and every one of them has any number of planets circling them, planets which could contain life.
Do you understand the grand scale at work here? Even put into terms I can kind of comprehend, I assure you, I still have no idea. All I know is that given such incredible numbers, “life by chance” is a concept I can totally envision.
Given that I cannot even understand what I know (lol), I accept the chance that a power beyond the limits of understanding exists somewhere.
What I can’t understand, and what I’d appreciate if you could explain, is how or why a power responsible for all that I’ve just listed could possibly give a fart in the wind for such a frail, simple, near sighted and close minded being such as a human. And not only give a fart, but also hold in the highest regard. Us. We who have the world, who fight and war and poison, who live our lives in supreme self-centricity, how can we possibly be His greatest creation?
Quote: Face
What are the odds that life could form randomly? Certainly they’re greater than one in a million, yes? One in a billion? Probably? How about one in a trillion?
Aren't these numbers meaningless when you consider
there are an infinite number of stars in an infinite number
of galaxies? And what if life is the norm in the universe
and not the exception? We can't know this yet, just like
ancient man didn't know he wasn't the center of the
universe. We thought that right up to the middle ages.
Quote: EvenBobAren't these numbers meaningless when you consider
there are an infinite number of stars in an infinite number
of galaxies?
That's above my pay grade =)
I'm trying to remain inside the constraints of my own mind and deal with irrefutable fact. We know the approximate size of the visible universe. We know the approximate number of stars contained therein. And even knowing this, not believing but knowing, we (or at least I) still cannot comprehend it.
I get “a million”. I can visualize it, I can understand it. “Billion” already starts to stretch my abilities. “Trillion” is something I have to sort of pretend that I “get”, because I really don’t. Here, we’re talking about a billion trillion. Even the thought of it turns me into a drooling idiot as my brain says “f$%^ that” and shuts down.
So forgetting the parallel universe theories and such and just sticking with what is known, I’d be interested in a believer’s thoughts on why they think we humans are the chosen ones, given that we seem, in the grand scheme of things, to be completely insignificant.
Quote: FaceI’d be interested in a believer’s thoughts on why they think we humans are the chosen ones, given that we seem, in the grand scheme of things, to be completely insignificant.
They believe it because they believe in writings that
were done when we still wiped our butts with dried
leaves and wrote on sheepskins.
Quote: EvenBobThey believe it because they believe in writings that
were done when we still wiped our butts with dried
leaves and wrote on sheepskins.
That’s not fair.
While there are certainly close-minded theists that have never stepped outside of their theist box, there are plenty who are aware and intelligent enough to have pondered these same ideas I have. New Earth believers aside, I’m sure there are many that have pondered these same questions and have had to fit their beliefs in somehow. I’m genuinely interested in how they’ve done so.
Maybe this’ll pull FrGamble back in from hiding… /fingers crossed
Kirk and Spock wax philosophic
Quote: FaceThat’s not fair.
I'm sure thats what they thought when they used
a poison Oak leaf between their cheeks..
Quote: EvenBobI'm sure thats what they thought when they used
a poison Oak leaf between their cheeks..
Knowing I'm a country boy, you can imagine the nightmare you just descirbed lol
Quote: MoscaAm I the only one who has looked at this question and seen a form of The Incompleteness Theorems? Proof will always lie outside the tools we have to use.
I had to look it up. Now I've been completely struck dumb and entirely soaked from the drool falling out of my idiot, gaping mouth.
I reckon it'd take 40 readings just to get a hint of a grasp on it, so I'll just ask...
Am I asking one of those "unfair questions"?
Or maybe a request - ask your question again in terms a 12th grader could understand =p
Quote: FaceCan we simple humans even grasp what one trillion means? Here’s a thought for you…
This is what a trillion dollars looks like.
Quote: FaceI had to look it up. Now I've been completely struck dumb and entirely soaked from the drool falling out of my idiot, gaping mouth.
I reckon it'd take 40 readings just to get a hint of a grasp on it, so I'll just ask...
Am I asking one of those "unfair questions"?
Or maybe a request - ask your question again in terms a 12th grader could understand =p
I'm not a math guy, nor smarter than the average bear. Quoting Wikipedia, because its math stuff is pretty well sorted out,
Quote:The first incompleteness theorem states that no consistent system of axioms whose theorems can be listed by an "effective procedure" (e.g., a computer program, but it could be any sort of algorithm) is capable of proving all truths about the relations of the natural numbers (arithmetic). For any such system, there will always be statements about the natural numbers that are true, but that are unprovable within the system. The second incompleteness theorem, an extension of the first, shows that such a system cannot demonstrate its own consistency.
If you consider "proof of deity" as a logical problem, then you're eventually faced with the fact that any deity with the power to alter the system has to be above and outside the system. For example, any deity that is omniscient and omnipotent can absolutely plant fossil evidence to fool us into believing in an ancient earth, and we would have no way of understanding that deity's motivation for doing so. To me it looks like the same problem that Godel addressed.
In the end, I stopped arguing sides in all this stuff because it doesn't matter. It wasn't any fun antagonizing people whom I like, so I dropped it.
Quote: FaceI had to look it up. Now I've been completely struck dumb and entirely soaked from the drool falling out of my idiot, gaping mouth.
I reckon it'd take 40 readings just to get a hint of a grasp on it, so I'll just ask...
Am I asking one of those "unfair questions"?
Or maybe a request - ask your question again in terms a 12th grader could understand =p
Read Hofstadter's(*) "Godel, Escher, Bach : An enternal golden braid". Answers these questions, but leaves very many more.
(*) No, not the one on Big Bang Theory. But he is named after this one.
