17 Jun 08
Originally posted by twhiteheadi called creationist scientists stupid
Even though you said that anyone who does so is stupid.
[b] and you choose whether to respect religious people, which you don't
Neither do you - you called them stupid.[/b]
i said belief in something proven to be wrong is stupid for documented people, for people supposedly educated. ignorant people are excused.
nobody proved god to be wrong. so belief in him doesn't fall into the above category.
do you enjoy taking things out of context? is it fun only taking the first meaning you find? maybe this is why you came to the conclusion that god didn't exist, you just picked the first easy explanation.
17 Jun 08
Originally posted by ZahlanziOK, I read it wrong.
i called creationist scientists stupid
i said belief in something proven to be wrong is stupid for documented people, for people supposedly educated. ignorant people are excused.
nobody proved god to be wrong. so belief in him doesn't fall into the above category.
do you enjoy taking things out of context? is it fun only taking the first meaning yo ...[text shortened]... you came to the conclusion that god didn't exist, you just picked the first easy explanation.
I thought you said that anyone who believed a book without evidence was stupid. Reading your post again I realize I was mistaken and you only said that they were stupid if there was contradictory evidence (proof). (am I right this time?)
Do you believe that Jesus rose from the dead?
17 Jun 08
Originally posted by twhiteheadi believe him to be the son of god(unproven and also not dis proven). so normal rules that say that a human cannot rise from the dead do not apply to him(although people did died and resurrected - clinical deaths). so i believe he rose from the dead.
OK, I read it wrong.
I thought you said that anyone who believed a book without evidence was stupid. Reading your post again I realize I was mistaken and you only said that they were stupid if there was contradictory evidence (proof). (am I right this time?)
Do you believe that Jesus rose from the dead?
if someone would provide an explanation why he became alive after he was crucified i would reconsider my position. the bible says that his apostles and other people have seen him after he rose from the dead. do you think they were lying? this is an unproven fact because you cannot say for sure they aren't lying but also not dis proven fact because you cannot say for sure they are lying.
17 Jun 08
Originally posted by ZahlanziI do not believe Jesus even was the son of "God," because I think he was simply an unremarkable figure. He preached nonviolence, and all that, and he was killed by the Romans because he did not adhere to their beliefs (sound familiar?). A bit like Gandhi, who, by the way, according to the Christian standards, would go to Hell because he was not Christian.
i believe him to be the son of god(unproven and also not dis proven). so normal rules that say that a human cannot rise from the dead do not apply to him(although people did died and resurrected - clinical deaths). so i believe he rose from the dead.
if someone would provide an explanation why he became alive after he was crucified i would reconsider my ...[text shortened]... they aren't lying but also not dis proven fact because you cannot say for sure they are lying.
I don't know what happened to his body, but there are several explanations, including tomb robbers (explaining the rocks) and the fact that the people who saw the body "missing" were on hallucinogens. But, come on, if Christ was the son of God and I'm just a blubbering idiot (face it, I'm not 😉 ), he would be able to move his body without having been able to move the rocks. Bodies can't float in the air, anyway.
17 Jun 08
3 edits
Originally posted by ZahlanziThat was not my argument at all! That is not what I said! My argument is not “why didn’t god give us supper-human powers or give us extra organs such as gills or special abilities such as moving objects with our mind etc”. My argument was, as I said in a round-about way, “why would an all-powerful all-knowing god create design flaws in us”
...
just because god didn't make you a complete awesome clark kent it doesn't prove his non-existence. if you would have been made like superman, you would have said that god must not exist because he didn't give you gills, or the ability to move objects with your mind.
...
.
I could be more specific by asking: “why would an all-powerful all-knowing god create design flaws within some of the organs of the human body he gave us?” for example why would god design our retinas back-to-front etc. Only an idiot would design a retina that way.
Is "god" an idiot?
17 Jun 08
1 edit
Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonDid you read about Jesus in the New Testament ?
That was not my argument at all! That is not what I said! My argument is not “why didn’t god give us supper-human powers or give us extra organs such as gills or special abilities such as moving objects with our mind etc”. My argument was, as I said in a round-about way, “why would an all-powerful all-knowing god create design flaws in us”
I coul ...[text shortened]... r retinas back-to-front etc. Only an idiot would design a retina that way.
Is "god" an idiot?
Did you ever come across a passage in Hebrews which says:
"those ... who have been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit and have tasted of the good word of God and the powers of the age to come" (Heb. 6:4,5) ?
What do you think the Bible means "tasted ... of the powers of the age to come."?
Do you think that God has something in store for the saved which they only taste today, yet will have a richer experience of in the age to come ?
Did you notice how Jesus gave authority to His disciples to heal the sick and even raise some of the dead?
What do you think the Apostle John meant when he wrote that " we shall be like Him" (1 John 3:2)
Did you ever come across a passage in the book or Romans that reads this way?
"For the anxious watching of the creation eagerly awaits the revelation of the sons of God. For the creation was made subject to vanity not of its own will, but because of Hom who subjected it.
In hope that the creation itself will also be fred from the slavery of corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God." (Rom. 8:18-21)
Do you think these things might be related? That is being partakers of the Holy Spirit and tasting of the powers of the age to come, and the creation being freed into the freedom of the glory of the children of God, who are like Him.
Do you think it might be worth studying these things in the Bible?
17 Jun 08
Originally posted by Zahlanzi"Educated" or not, it is impolite to call people stupid.
i called creationist scientists stupid
i said belief in something proven to be wrong is stupid for documented people, for people supposedly educated. ignorant people are excused.
nobody proved god to be wrong. so belief in him doesn't fall into the above category.
do you enjoy taking things out of context? is it fun only taking the first meaning yo ...[text shortened]... you came to the conclusion that god didn't exist, you just picked the first easy explanation.
18 Jun 08
4 edits
Originally posted by jaywill“…Do you think that God has something in store for the saved which they only taste today, yet will have a richer experience of in the age to come ? …”
...
Do you think that God has something in store for the saved which they only taste today, yet will have a richer experience of in the age to come ?
Did you notice how Jesus gave authority to His disciples to heal the sick and even raise some of the dead?
...
Do you think it might be worth studying these things in the Bible?
I thought I couldn’t have made it more obvious that I don’t think any god or gods exists. So, given that fact of that context, your question makes no sense. How can I “…think that God has something in store for …” -whatever, when I don’t think any god exists?
“…Did you notice how Jesus gave authority to His disciples to heal the sick and even raise some of the dead?…”
I would have thought it would have been obvious that, given that I am not superstitious, I don’t believe people can perform miracles and any claim that they do is a lie. And, as for the “…Did you notice how Jesus…” part, how can I “notice how Jesus” does anything when I wasn’t there?
“…Do you think it might be worth studying these things in the Bible?”
Lets see now. Do I think it might be worth wasting an eternity studying a vast load of religious mumble-jumble and claptrap by reading the Bible? Err, no! I have better things to do with my life. Instead of wasting my time reading a vast amount of mumble-jumble, I could read something that is factual such as, say, a book on Darwinian evolution.
Besides, what on earth has any of this got to do with my argument? Remember, my argument was: “why would an all-powerful all-knowing god create design flaws in us”
As for the rest of what you said, I read it several times over and could not understand any of that religious mumble-jumble let alone what relevance it has to my argument.
Sorry, but I only understand plain-English! ðŸ˜
18 Jun 08
Originally posted by ZahlanziYoung Earth Creationists believe that the old testament God was God
i believe him to be the son of god(unproven and also not dis proven). so normal rules that say that a human cannot rise from the dead do not apply to him(although people did died and resurrected - clinical deaths). so i believe he rose from the dead.
(unproven and also not dis proven) so normal rules that say that dating methods are accurate do not apply. So YECs believe that the earth is approx 6-10 thousand years old - as implied by the biblical narrative.
Yet you call them stupid for having the exact same reasoning as you and feel that it is wrong for anyone to call you stupid for having beliefs that are no more rational than theirs.
if someone would provide an explanation why he became alive after he was crucified i would reconsider my position.
No you wouldn't. I am fairly sure that you have heard such explanations before. I am sure you could think up a few yourself. Any rational person who does not believe that Jesus was the Son of God would find many reasonable explanations and find them far more believable than assuming that it was a miracle.
the bible says that his apostles and other people have seen him after he rose from the dead.
The Bible says that the earth was made in Six days and that Adam and Even and even Noah are your ancestors. You don't believe that do you?
do you think they were lying?
You said "the Bible says" not "the apostles said". Think about it for a moment.
this is an unproven fact because you cannot say for sure they aren't lying but also not dis proven fact because you cannot say for sure they are lying.
Nothing can ever be "said for sure". Nothing in reality can be proven. Even the age of the earth cannot be proven.
However, I am sure that Jesus did not rise from the dead. I am as sure of that as I am sure that the earth is billions of years old.
There is good reason to believe that much of the gospels are made up (either by the writers or their sources). You hide behind the idea that nothing can be proven, yet do not give the same leeway to creationists.
18 Jun 08
6 edits
This is not an argument but just a description of what I believe:
Religion lays before us in advance of reason what we should and should not believe thus religion tells us not to reason and that is an insult to my intelligence and should be an insult to everybody’s intelligence except the stupid.
Except for the interpretation of sensory experience through very careful reason, the only reliable source of knowledge is through scientific method. All other ‘knowledge’ is flawed and that includes religion.
Every religion is just an arbitrary set of myths, superstitions and lies.
And, for religions that say there is an afterlife and excluding those people that are theists out of pure ignorance, it is often used by those that are so emotionally weak that they prefer to delude themselves into believing the absurd but comforting lie that they will live forever rather than be brave and emotionally strong enough to want to know the truth no mater how harsh that truth is and thus face the harsh reality that one day, like all of us, they will die never to be resurrected.
Those that persist in the delusional belief in the afterlife to their grave will never know the truth for, like the rest of us, they will never be resurrected.
18 Jun 08
Originally posted by Andrew Hamiltonthe retina issue, does it prevent you from seeing at all? or it simply prevents you to see better? do you need to see better? is your survival as a species endangered by the fact the retina is this way? the most obvious design flaw of our body isn't that the retina is back to front(never heard of it must research) the most obvious flaw is that we die. why would god make us die? you accept this design flaw but not the retina thingie that you probably don't even notice. is he an idiot now?
That was not my argument at all! That is not what I said! My argument is not “why didn’t god give us supper-human powers or give us extra organs such as gills or special abilities such as moving objects with our mind etc”. My argument was, as I said in a round-about way, “why would an all-powerful all-knowing god create design flaws in us”
I coul ...[text shortened]... r retinas back-to-front etc. Only an idiot would design a retina that way.
Is "god" an idiot?
18 Jun 08
Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonI too find this design mysterious.
for example why would god design our retinas back-to-front etc. Only an idiot would design a retina that way.
Originally posted by twhitehead
How do you come to that conclusion?
It does, however, have an evolutionary explanation. But for that one have to believe in evolution.