All you guys are programmers right?
Well heres a little poll. How many would count yourselves as Athiests?
I'll be intreasted to see the ratio Atheists:Believers

Atheistic agnostic - that is, I don't believe there is a God, but if you can prove that there is, fair enough.

(Oh, btw: This thread has a projected life span of about 20 minutes, before Matthew finds it and locks it for being about religion)

>>This thread probably has a projected life span of about 20 minutes, before Matthew finds it and locks it for being about religion.

I'm sure it won't come to that as long as programmers can stay calm

By the way my vote is for Atheist, although maybe thats not the right discription, I think believe there is "something", just don't subscibe to a religion.

The problem is people rarely can stay calm. Someone will always end up insulting someone else or someone will take someone else's remark as offensive, and before you know it it's all degenerated into a flame war.

Agnostic ... mebbe with an Atheist bent.
I got thru before Matthew blows it apart.

I'm right here.

>>The problem is people rarely can stay calm. Someone will always end up insulting someone else or someone will take someone else's remark as offensive, and before you know it it's all degenerated into a flame war.

Maybe, but its sad to think that people can't talk thinks out logically. Especially on a forum titled Off-Topic Ordeals. I've personelly found the people on this forum the calmest out of any forums from other sites.

Which they generally don't. Matthew closes these things as a rule.

I'm Christian; in fact, I just bought Lee Strobel's A Case for Christ. Exellent book, and at only 9 bucks Cdn, I recommend it highly, to believers and skeptics alike.

It won't last long enough to get an honest estimate There's a lot of Christians, a couple of Catholics, at least one Jehovah's Witness. About half of us are Athiests (rough guess).

X-G: I was wondering when you would do that with your avatar

Yes, it's sad, but also true. People aren't logical beings, no matter how much we try to be.

>> Yes, it's sad, but also true. People aren't logical beings, no matter how much we try to be.

Well so far things seem to be going well. The results so far are intreasting, anywhere else and the ratio would be very different but so far Atheists are the majority.???

I already told you:

Whether the thread works or not it'll get closed; Matthew dislikes religious discussions on this forum. I'm happy the troll responses haven't begun (aside from Inphernic's; who's he quoting?) but it's only been twenty minutes

I think all religions are created by humans in order to gain power.
The originators of religions might have started them by influence of god(s) but other have used the religions as a reason to fool ppl.

BTW I just live my life as I want to until a god heals my tinnitus. I won't be a true believer until then.

And why the hell does my browser go out of focus all the time?

Me? Trolling? Nooooooo.. you must be mistaken, dear sir - I would never EVER do something like that! No sirree!

ho hum

THE GORD IS ABSOLUTE!

(Trezker, no offense)

The flame war has started ... someone is BOUND to take what Trezker said as offensive ... things can only go bad from now on.

>>It won't last long enough to get an honest estimate.

Its unlikely its a fluke (something like five or ten percent of of ameriacans admitted to being an atheist). This poll currently has a ratio of something like Atheists:Believers 4:1 (counting myself).

>> someone is BOUND to take what Trezker said as offensive

Why it seemed like a harmless opinion.

I think all believers can be sorted in two categories, good ppl and brainwashed ppl.

No matter which religion good ppl are always good and the brainwashed can get fanatic in a flame war like this.

>> I think all believers can be sorted in two categories, good ppl and brainwashed ppl.

You could imply the same thing for atheists.

Yup. Its not limited to any 'type' of person. It can be said of EVERYONE.

No all ppl can be sorted in evil, good, normal and brainwashed.

But I agree on atheists.

Mark 1 more for

Athiest

Nope; I laughed But this isn't the place to debate.

I didn't say EVERYONE would, I said SOMEONE would.

I think someone should remember my theories from the last time I was appeared in a religius debate here. Even if it was about half a year ago.

Buddhist.

Religion isn't bad. Its the people you should blame. As people evolve things are changeing very fast. Compare now to a hundred years ago when people took religous word literally. Notice how attitudes towards women and black people the same time (most)people stoped taking religous word seriously. Now look at countries where religion is not strong. See a patern?

By the way, it is quite funny how Americans are so "religious". God save these and God save them. God save a little bit of this too. However, for example, the church attendances are a lot lower than they claim. I've heard that 50% claim to go to the church on every mess while the actual percentage is around 10% (no, this is not in the article snippet below, it was another article I even used as a source for an essay on this subject a few years ago).

You can see God's name everywhere. Everyone wants to say his name, but their words remain follow. People sure don't act as they preach. It seems that it has become more like a filler word nowadays. God (the word and the object) is heading for an inflation!

One article I was able to find to this dire need:

- Washington Times, Julia Duin

Hm, I also find it a bit disturbing that the religion "evolves" too - text in the bible changes. Basically it's like a cut'n'paste book where you put stuff appropriate for the current era. But shouldn't the base of a religion remain constant and untampered? It is the same religion anymore as it was aeons ago?

And no, this is no flamebait.

http://jesuschrist.rocks.it/

If you want to piss off a christian here's a good one. A friend made it.
BTW I'm a Christian, officially.

Most athiest theories about Christianity (and religion in general) tend to have little weight, are not well researched (if researched at all) and generally serve to give the athiest an excuse for rationalizing his own views. For an example, read the archived debate here. Lots of pet theories for the Athiest side, no actual facts.

I agree with Inphernic, that people follow God in word and not actions. It's pretty sad

The Bible is 99.5 textually pure from the day it was written. Some cults change texts (the Jehovah's Witnesses are notorious for it) but we have way too many historical documents (over 24,000 for the New Testement alone; 8000 of which are in the original Greek) to back up the current text.

I couldn't say what I am. I guess you could say I'm skeptical about the whole (Christian)religion thing. I was raised to believe in it, and probably did for a while. Now I kind of stand ... undecided I suppose (if that's possible )?

The only problem I see with religion is there's so many of them, and most people believe in what they do beceause they were raised that way. I'm sure there ARE converts to other religions.. which suggests some people just "choose" what's best for themselves. Another problem thing is... which one is "right"? All of them? One of them? None of them? There's just so many, it's hard to place any fact on anything in this situation. I would say don't bother arguing about it.

>> I've heard that 50% claim to go to the church on every mess while the actual percentage is around 10%

Religion will not just disappear. Do you know that there was a time when people believed in Zesus? People are breaking more and more of the rules all the time and not caring. How many believers have sex before marriage. And look at the divorce rate.

We're already off-topic. We were supposed to just state what we were, not argue back and forth. I can feel the flame war coming ...

We're not arguing. I haven't seen any disagreement at all
Besides, it's religious discussion. I used to debate as a hobby; I can't resist

Besides, Matthew's gonna lock it anyway, so who cares if we're good or not, really

Same can be said for most religious persons.

My ass. You don't need to go to church to belive or whatever. The main 'Pro' of being a beliver is 'comfort'. It helps you live. (IMHO) And thats not limited to beliving in GOD. If you belive in 'something' (ie: science), It keeps you waking up every day.

>> I can feel the flame war coming ...

Maybe not. Because most people here are overwhelmingly Atheists. Most people here have taken an argument and given a logical answer.

It would be great if everyone just left all religius shit and just be themselves. I don't think the world would be much different. Except that suicides would be alot more popular. But there too much ppl on this planet anyway.

Well, my theorys involved gods that programmed our reality. And coming to heaven would mean they made a robotic body so you could live with them.
And hell would mean the same thing but you would be their slave.

And if the gods really like you they'd give you admin rights in our reality.

Isn't that the best and most easy to understand religion?

er... so you are still not "just stating what
we were" by -discussing- which is close
enough to argument...

I'm dumb!... I found that odd too... people these
days, they don't read whole posts, pick
up on sarcasm and irony and they don't
follow the guidelines for polls posted
by other people

It's just a matter of time. This WILL turn into a flame war, sooner or later.

No doubt, but it's a bit different. Take Trezker; he offers a view that allows him to dismiss all religion. A person following one religion can't do that. He needs reasons to follow that one in particular. Even for "brainwashed" believers, the differences are there.

Exactly! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than going into a garage makes you a car, as they say

I assume that's tongue in cheek But this isn't the place for full-on debate (too bad )

>> I can't resist

I'm with you there 23

I think that the main thing is to separate god from religion. Belief in religion needs god but belief in god does not require belief in a religion.

Yeah. I belive. But Im not sure what exactly it is I belive in... I mean to prove my scientific theoretical views there'd have to be some one/thing to have started it all off (somewhere). But If I was to 'religiously' follow scripture or alot of christians that I've met, Science is hogwash. (especially the 'Age of things' or the evolutionist (sp?) theorys...)

Actually, one note. In the last thread, Derezo implied I was afraid of my views being challenged or something. I love debating this stuff in fact, and since Matthew is going to close this (don't pretend otherwise) I'll just say anyone who wants to can take this to e-mail if you really want to talk about this subject

hmm...

riiiiiiiiiiiight....

Um... not if you're anything like the guy I met last year at school... Ughhh... lets see if I can find his website...

[url http://www.wotw.info] Yup. thats it.

The guy got very protective... sheesh.

Do you know that it's Zeus, not Zesus?

And I quote myself: Everyone wants to say his name, but their words remain follow. People sure don't act as they preach.

Oh yes, I completely forgot that one! Even the Jesus said something like that there's no need for churches - as long as the religion is in your heart.

I don't believe in anything, I don't trust anyone and I stand for one thing, to stand for nothing.
My opinion changes as I get wiser. The wise man knows that he knows nothing.

I live my life doing what I find interesting and with the hope that some day a god will chat with me and straigten things out so I know what to do to come to heaven. Until that day comes I stick to the belief that you just dissappear when you die, and magic is the only thing in our universe that cannot be explained.

But I'm good at making up theories.

Exactly, there must be "something" but I don't believe its religion (too illogical). Humans don't understand so they have to invent something. Remember when people thought the Sun revolved around the Earth? We will understand one day.

I believe in God. Add one to the Believers' side.
I'd say more, but... meh.

Remember "The lifters guide to the galaxy"(I'm swedish mkey) Where Arthur Dent found out that earth was a computer built by the rats and designed by that planet building ppl.

Later(I think) He found out that humans were the ppl of another planet, on wich they were not wanted.

>>I believe in God. Add one to the Believers' side.

Thats....Two?

I think that there is enough votes for things to be "fair". And things seems to be going in a certain direction.......

Eh, there were primitive man-like creatures in the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (;)) before the other people got there. They were just made extinct by the unwanteds. You know, the ones they tried to teach Scrabble?

Not one scientific discovery goes against a word in the Bible. Even taken as a parable, Genesis follows the scientific course of Earth's history exactly.

TF: I recommended Lee Stroble's A Case for Christ above. It's written by a legal journalist who went around interviewing 20 experts trying to disprove Christianity, and ended up converting himself. It is FULL of evidences of Christianity; in fact every chapter is called "The (something or other) Evidence". The only bad part is a distinct lack of input from an anti-Christian viewpoint (all the experts interviewed were Christian) but you can find mindless anti-Christian material anywhere

I can easily name a dozen or more posters who are Thiests and who won't get here before Matthew does. It's about 50/50 of the forum regulars; take my word

(you can tell how often this comes up when it racks up 46 posts in 90 minutes )

On a lighter side:

Ok so when the hell is Matthew coming? Did we time this thread in the middle of his beautysleep?

I think the bible is a good bok, but it's too boring to read. It's when I started to read the bible that I came up with my computer theory.

uuuuggghhhhhh.... That is sooooooooooo bad. Im not exagerating. Thats terrible!

See now, if Matthew had made me a mod, I'd be forced to close it, but nooooooo
EDIT: Bob's wandering around now, so maybe he'll do it ...

Nice new avatar btw.

I'm a bit out of ammo now. And I should disconnect soon to. But it feels good to have been a little social since I haven't been out of my house for six months(roughly). Not counting unavoidable one day trips to take care of business.

I believe god is evil, what do you call that?

Uninformed? I'd ask for your reasons, but that's e-mail material ...

A god is a being with administrative rights in our reality.

In order to define the goodness of a god you must specify which god you mean.

How does one go about making their own religion an "actual" religion.. you know, if they made one up?

Ask Mr. 'L. Ron Hubbard'.

No. That would make Satan a god since he has the "administrative rights" on Earth, and he's only an angel. And if you need a specific God, I would mean the Christian one, personally (not sure about SSC )...

Ultio: By preaching it, of course!

A religion is a religion when it has political power, otherwise it's a cult. And is it's really small it's just a theory, like mine.

But not too 'preachy'. That scares people like me AWAY.. FAR FAR AWAY.

He just has moderator privileges.

Whatever happened to the seperation of church and state? You're post confuses me; how exactly do religion and politics even relate? True, there are religious institutions that have a political presence, but that's a choice, not a rule ...

First you preach, and when you have a cult you can start aggressive preaching.

The devil is actually an archangel, pretty much like Melkor in Arda.

EDIT: I read somewhere that acult is a religion without political power. I don't know if it's true.

waits for lightning bolt Atheist.

Cults. (from a Christian perspective)

BTW, who other than DTK noticed I added a link to Hell in my sig a week ago?

Of course, I think you could accuse that link of being a bit biased since it comes from the "CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS & RESEARCH MINISTRY"

My nearest dictionary says a cult is "A system or community of religious worship and ritual".

I know, but from an athiest viewpoint, all religions are cults, really .
EDIT: you're own dictionary definition says as much

I don't really understand why any religious person would participate in a flame war - you know we atheists are going to burn in hell anyway so why bother

No one can deny that religious right (conservative christians with fundamentalist leaning)hold a great deal of political power thru influence here in the US, especially in the midwest and Texas.

Me, I don't believe in an afterlife but I do believe there is super motivating force acting in the universe. Wether its a divine being or an artifact of the structure of the universe itself, I don't know.

heheh... I noticed that awhile back... heheh
funny stuff..;D

That's WHY we discuss it (while avoiding the flame war)

does that make sence??

I think I'd count in as atheistic, maybe a little agnostic. It's hard to draw a line.

I refuse to believe in the existance of a "supreme being" like a god. Often people praise Christianity for its humanitarian values. Those are great, should be considered as a direction for everyone, are found in many constitutions. But I dislike the God-Part.

The little beginning of my theory is mainly that everything is somehow connected. I don't think stuff is seperated and all-individual. Instead all there is only forms the representation of the world, a giant netting. Patterns occure in it that we see as reason, relation, examples of a higher explication. Maybe the "force" that causes this could be called "God".

As the human brain is layed out, there seem to be parts that are made to give us a feeling of religion. So perhaps people only "believe" because brains interpret these relations in that way. Maybe the very same area of my brain makes me think my ideas.

But the existance of an "über-person" like a God is often explained doesn't sound interesting to me.

No, but it does make sense We don't want you to go to Hell, now do we?

riiight... guess not, I should have seen that...

Apparently God does want us to go to hell.

John 3:16. About as well-known a verse as you can get, really
Also read John 3:17 - 21 for good measure

Thats a perfect example of flawed/conflicting forms of logic.

Deductive-using data to deduce theories and physical laws that can be tested in under controlled conditions.

Inductive-Already having conclusions, laws and theories and using available data to proof or disprove.

Religious people always try to use inductive reasoning to prove religion whereas the deductive side (scientist, reasonable human beings) doesn't give a rats *ss.

Does belief in Christ help me make a faster microchip?

I don't have access to a copy of The Divine Fairytale, so you're going to have to quote whatever the hell that is supposed to be.

If anyone here has actually taken the time to read the Bible, from cover to cover, they know there is ALOT of really screwed up stuff in that book. I read it and I couldn't believe some of it. "This is a religious book?" (All of the stuff about the Ark of the Covenant is in there too (from Indina Jones) thats kinda cool.)

nonnus29: the author fit your definition of "deductive". The book is about how he turned from believer to skeptic, by attacking the evidence and finding it held up. Try reading it.

I don't understand how some always assume the Theists go the "inductive" route. You don't think it's even possible the facts back Christianity? If anything, I see that kind of thinking in the Evolutionist camp more than anywhere else.

Several dozen times, and not all in the same translation. I await a point (though I think Matthew's about to get a good reason to close this in the next few posts )

I'm saying you can make the facts back anything you want. I don't see this guys book changing that.

I can't help but be reminded of the "evidence" presented by Anselm of Canterbury (at least, I think it was him):

1) God is the greatest, best thing - superior to every other being in existence.
2) Existing is better than not existing.
3) Hence, God exists, or he wouldn't be the greatest, best thing.

See the flaw?

Ummm ... nor is it meant to.
I'm really not getting your point here.

I'm not Catholic, basically because yes, I see the flaws So ... whatever.

I agree with you there, I can't stand people that treat a theory (even if it has alot of data to back it up) like a belief.

Edit: in real life I never discuss religion or politics with people, I'm not change your mind and your not gonna change mine, so whats the point?

Anybody here who does not believe in code reuse?
(And I can't believe the thread is still open)

All scientific 'theory's are beliefs. Not one can be Unequivicably proven beyond belief. It's when you start 'preaching' your 'beliefs' (too much) that you become crazy.

Actually, it was in the debate on GameDev that I became convinced of Evolution's flaws. I love doing these sorts of things for the learning, not the winning. I suppose I could also say I do it for the teaching, but I'm not arrogant enough to think I know that much

You can't believe Matthew can go more than 2 hours without looking at this forum? Sorry; you're thinking of me

Matthew must be in church this morning....;D

EDIT:

huh? So if you were a biologist would you be willing to be put on a cross for "evolution"?

I agree. However, from talkorigins.org ...

See here.

nonnus: lmao

OMG (<- irony in statement noted ), 23 is a Creationist?

I thought better of you

(and of course, in any Creationism debate I always post this)

Matthew is going to sh*t when he sees this thread has over 100 posts in two hours,

H*ll, I was surprised when I loged in and it was alread at 60!

Well, I've lived with a mormon, a muslim and 3 christians during my university years I also have an interest in religion.

I'm actually atheist, and I have to say that the people I know who are christians are some of the nicest people I've ever met. Still even though I am not atheist I do have a philosophy I beleive in. Not sure what the right term for that is..

Chris, you've interested me. I thought that the biblical idea of creation and the scientific idea of creation were in essence opposing and incompatible. What information do you have to suggest that this is not true?

Religion, Science, Philosophy, they are all fascinating!

Nope There's plenty of theories about Earth's history beyond Evolution and Creation (ID, punctuated equilibrium, etc.). I simply don't buy any of them, though I admit I tend to swing toward Creation sometimes. Just to irk the heathens

Not really, if you look closely. Both admit the Earth was covered in water (Ice Age/Noah's Flood) both support dinosaurs (dragons, as they were called. See the end of Job (the oldest book in the Bible); a description of the "behemoth" and "leviathan"; the last fits the description of an elasmosaurus perfectly). Both claim mankind decended from a single female (Mitochondria Eve), etc. They're just two takes on the same information. Eg. scientists claim there's no evidence of a flood, yet look at the massive erosion such a flood might cause and then say it's proof the Earth is billions of years old. The evidence supports both sides, though I still think Creation is the more plausible of the two.

Believe it

I think I turned the last one into a flame war when someone said I didn't have the right to discuss it since I had a porno star (fully clothed) for my avatar. NOW that really ticked me off.

Heh ... one must differentiate between the material and ideological aspects of religion. I have religious friends, and they are nice people like anyone else. That's the material aspect. Then there's the ideological aspect, which I frankly find corrupt, but can't care enough about to be bothered by.

100 posts and no flame war, nice!

heck. It could all be some one's halucination..

[edit]X-G: I deffinitly agree[/edit]

Did anyone else read about that discovery in the news of a stone dating from the 1st century AD that had jesus name carved into it?

What, biblical graffiti?

Atheist here, non practicing, though

It seems strange to me that people who do not believe in supernatural things are defined as deviant (from the norm): atheists = non god-believers.

Does it make sense to define me according to something that I simply have nothing to do with? How about: non-public-defecator? non-levitator? non-white? non-man? -YES! My goal IS to make the term 'atheist' into a non politically correct phrase!

Don't mean to offend - it's interesting to discuss this - now if only I could keep my big mouth shut.. fat chance

Well, I guess in a couple of decades believers will be described as a-atheists

/'person going to hell for no obvious reason'

sorry, it's not a stone, it's a burial box..

The limestone burial box for bones - called an ossuary - bears an inscription reading "James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus" in the Aramaic language.

You mean you're a non-mouth-shutter?

RP: I made a big edit up there for you (five new posts before it was done; you guys are nuts )
Been a while since I read Foolish Faith online but I think you might find it interesting ...

Sorry CB, but that's REALLY tenuous evidence there.

If you look closely at things you can see patterns into almost anything. I need to see some hard evidence before I'm swayed even slightly towards the creation idea.

If it's tenuous evidence, it's tenuous both ways. What patterns? What are you talking about?
I wasn't even trying to prove Creation You asked about contradictions; I suggested there were none. Do you know of any?

Atheist/realist.

I don't believe in a god or upperbeing, and from a scientific point of view find the postulate of such an entity dubious. Of course I'm not saying that there is no such thing as a God, since I can never hope to prove such a thing.

It goes without saying (I hope) that I respect the believes of others.

BTW, realist is by no means intended to imply that people who are not atheists cannot be realists.

Edit: what does this have to do with people being programmers in the first place?

Edit 2: I don't really consider myself a programmer. I'm a physicist, with programming as one of my hobbies.

This has been most intreasting. About two people from this thread have admitted to creationist views in 110 replies. Thank You Programmers.

Science has given you the computers in front of you. What has that bible given (apart from war)?

Religion was created in a time when the people did not understand why the sun rose, how a child was created, how the birds flew. Guess what? Now we know all these things, we have less need to believe. As we find out more we will believe even less. We are evolving.

PS: I am glad people have stayed away from personal attacks and got on with the discussion.

Well..

A biblical flood is not the same as an ice age.
Dinosaurs are not the same as dragons.
if you believe evolution then men were not alive when dinosaurs were.

etc..

Sorry, but you did ask.

Im with 23 here when he says read A Case for Christ, its a pretty good book and gets you thinking.

Never said it was.

Explain.

Ah, but as I have said (and could continue to say) there is plenty of evidence that they DID know about dinosaurs. Paintings of dinosaurs have been found in Aboriginal caves, cultures worldwide mention dragons in their ancient history (do you think they all thought the same thing up?), etc. "if you believe evolution", but I don't

It doesn't rise A few places in the Bible claim the Earth is round, which was unheard of at the time

Children are created from DNA. How was DNA created?

I have not yet seen a religious book claim God supports birds. See those feathery things on both sides?

SSC: you surprise me; you've read it? I agree it's not conclusive, but it does get you thinking ...

>> Im with 23 here when he says read A Case for Christ, its a pretty good book and gets you thinking.

Sure, I might try it. Out of curiosity have you read any books that argue against the existance of god?

You're right. But although science can explain most phenomena, it can't explain everything. Like death and what comes after it. That's why these days most people who find god, it is when they're diagnosed with cancer or some other terminal disease. In the age of science that is just about the only time when one has the need to beleive in something supernatural (i.e. god).

Personally, yes (mostly online). Most of it is pretty uninformed; I can't say I recall seeing a major arguement that hasn't been rebutted a million times before. Not to say Christianity is without flaw, of course Feel invited to point me at some fresh material ...

People should believe in whatever they want,
The only time it is wrong is when they mistakenly call it science.

God has nothing to do with science, since he has not yet been proven, nor disproven.
If you want to insert God into science, it will remain a theory, therefore cannot be used for anything practical.

In order to prove or disprove god, a real definition for it has to be made, and none exists yet.

Okay, heres what i've found out so far, correct me if i'm wrong(i'm sure you will;)

In II Kings 2-23/24 we read about God sending 2 bears to maul 42 children to death for the sin of calling a guy bald. Is this the Christian morality concept we hear so much about?

Prayer?
by Tesko

According to Christians, God created everything, God knows everything, God is all good, and God is omnipotent. Most Christians will tell you that something happened due to God's will, and it is wrong to question god.

Say you break up with your significant other after a long relationship, it hurts very badly. It hurts so badly you cry all night, barely eat anything during the day and other negative things may occur because of this. You decide to pray to God and ask him to take the pain away.

"Dear lord, please take my pain away."

Since your pain is god's will, you are asking him to go against his will, and therefor you are questioning God, hence sinning. Basically you are telling your "great creator" of which who knows everything, that he actually does not.

Every single time you pray and ask for a change, you are telling God that his will is wrong and that he should change it to convenience you, someone, or something that directly or indirectly affects you. How selfish of you!

If you are praying to give thanks, remember that god already knows if you truly are greatful to God or not, so prayer is not needed. If you still insist on praying to give thanks, also remember that God also knows every word you are going to say before you say it.

Prayer is useless and sometimes a sin.

Elisha. I know the passage. It takes all of 2 verses, so who knows what happened (what kind of insult is "Go up, go up" anyway ?!?). There's also the matter of Elisha's authority; God hearkens to the Word of Man on many occasions. Now, can you tell me why?

On prayer: God never said he'd baby us.

You're logic is flawed in assuming that everything in existence is according to God's will. Wanna back that up?

Yup, that's biblical. It's also true that of all the miracles Jesus performed, the person being healed had to explicitly ask first (even an obviously blind man). You're not really making any points here ...

#define GOD "Funklord"

Any objections?

Hmm?

I thought you indicated that you equated ice ages with the flood:

The reason I said that dinosaur's aren't dragons is:

Dragons are supposedly large reptiles with wings who in some myths can fly and breath fire.

Dinosaurs are a vast multitude of different dinosaurs, from creatures the size of dogs to ones bigger than buildings. Their shape is also widely varied.

Now, I can see where people call them dragons, but then I could say that humans are apes because they have the same basic shape.

anyway, I don't want to start a flame war. Can't we make our own religion? All pay homage to the prophet Peter Hull!!

Nope. The Leviathan swam, couldn't fly, and breathed no fire. Dragons come in a huge variety; they mirror dinosaurs exactly.

No, just pointing out an (admittedly general) case of a non-contradiction.

score another for Christian.

I have to say. holy shnikeys! you people have posted over 120 posts in 3 hours! gosh!

JaTeR

Chris: I'm not sure what you ment by the smilie.. But that response is what I find is a typical 'religious' answer.. It totally avoids the main statement/question. And still tries to prove your point...

Maybe its just because Im very tired... but really...

Firstly would you say that god has a plan and that everything that happans is because our omnipotent god wills it so. Therefore all existance is according to how god wants it to be. I thought this was universally accepted by all god fearing folk.

religion is stupid. it mostly bases itself on the fact that it can explain all in the universe that modern science cant explain, and if people cant understand that explanation then they must just have faith in that god made everything and there obvuiosly is a reason for it being made. this is mildly illogical becuase what if scientists could explain almost every last detail of the universe including how it was created and when it will be destroyed. will people need to believe in a greater power anymore if they understand everything about the universe? without mystery, there is no need for the supernatural and thus human-kind can become a master of their own destiny. of course, it is unimaginable to be able to understand everythign about the universe which i guess is why so many people would quickly deny what i am saying, but in theory it is possible.

Um... maybe GOD Fearing folk... Thats a totally paranoid view. I think something/someone had to start it all off... but to stick around this long wathcing us screw up so much? No sentient being has that much patience

How? The idea ank 2 is putting forth is that people back the said "It's God!" every time something happened they couldn't explain. I'm pretty sure if they observed the birds for a while, they'd notice they utilize those wings when flying. I don't know how my plumbing works; I don't attribute the water coming out of the faucet to God. I attribute it to turning the tap. People two thousand years ago were ignorant, not stupid.

So what's this main question I'm missing?

Having a plan doesn't mean you control all aspects of reality. We have our free will, and exercise it. You're really stretching your points here.

Dragons are a fiction, Dinosaurs existed.

Although I'd like to have a dragon as a pet...

Dragons are not only known for size,
they often are described as much smarter than humans since they live for circa 800 yrs, and that their skin is very hard to penetrate (needs special mythril weapons) therefore makes good material for shields and armour.
Dragons are not only born from eggs, they can be summoned from other realms too.
They are magical beings too, which makes them able to sometimes cast spells and heal themselves, and obviously they have some very powerful reactions going in in their digestive system since they can breath fire.

It;s the 'I have not yet seen a religious book claim God supports birds' part... Why would he not support birds? I still don't get what you meant. (Im quite tired... can't get to sleap...)

>>it mostly bases itself on the fact that it can explain all in the universe that modern science cant explain

Thats why man needs it less and less. Why do you think that the religious have tried to stop technological progress. Anyone know the churh tried to stop use of planes, trains or anything that could erode belief in the bible.

Since you seem to be knowledge about this Chris, can I ask you a question?

Say I lead a very good life and I am a christian, helping everyone and trying to be a good person. When I die will I go to heaven?

Now:

Say I lead a very good life and I am NOT a christian, helping everyone and trying to be a good person. When I die will I go to hell?

If I will go to hell despite all my actions, then can I ask why?

ooohhh... w0w.. my brain just made a connection to another 'religious' type topic!!! Beaurocracy... Gotta love Beaurocracy!

My answer to RP is my last post; I'm simultaneously posting and coding, and it's just not working out

Yup.

There's room for variety in my response, but I'll be brief and say yes.

Because your actions don't amount to jack. I could quote to China and back how our own righteousness are as rags to the Lord. It's John 3:16 again; we go to Heaven because of God, not ourselves. You can't earn Heaven.

That's nice. The Catholic church also endorses evolution, last I checked. If religious leaders want to block science, then they're idiots. Like I said, science hasn't contradicted Christianity once.

>>Having a plan doesn't mean you control all aspects of reality. We have our free will, and exercise it.

Its not merely the fact that god has plan its the fact that he is a perfect omnipotent being. He does not make mistakes. So we should be doing Exactly what he wants. But we have free will? This is a contridiction in terms(another one to add to the bible).

Hmm.. so people understood flight 2000 yrs ago?
interesting...

- Father! how does that bird fly?
- Well son, it uses it's wings to flap for air velocity, and the aerodynamic shape of it's body allows it to float through the air with very little resistance whilst the pressure from below its wingspan works against the force of gravity.
- Ohh cool, so can I fly too?
- Well of course, if I build you this little thing here I call an aeroplane...

Didn't he have to create Woman because he made man imperfectly? (Lonely?)

So basically, all the people who have never heard of Christianity (think of those born before 0 BC!) should just go rape and pillage and murder because, hey, they're going to hell anyway?

Really? God openly admits to making a mistake when he made Saul king, for starters. I honestly don't know where you get this

Didn't Leonardo design a helicopter .... yeah; I know that was later, but I'm trying to make a point. Like I said, people were ignorant. Not stupid.

Right, that's my lot. I'm out of here; toodles.

>> Didn't he have to create Woman because he made man imperfectly? (Lonely?)

Add that to the list of contridictions.

that wasnt 2000 years ago! more like a few hundred (5 ish?)

What would religion be like if there were no life after death?

>> Really? God openly admits to making a mistake when he made Saul king, for starters. I honestly don't know where you get this

If god is omnipotent he cannot make a mistake. Your adding more and more contridictions to the dabate.

Interesting fact: the "founder" of Christianity, not Jesus (who was a Jew) but Paul, thinks that his words are better than those of God himself!

(Gal 1:8) "But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel other than what we have preached to you, a curse be on him!"

No, he tried to, but failed.
At least he discovered that the human body did not exert enough kinetic energy to allow the flight of such a heavy object.

Did leonardo live 2000 yrs ago?
As I recall, even 500 yrs ago he was many times close to being called a pagan and burnt on a stake.

Did I say he was?!? Geez; quit making assumptions and just read the thing.
TF: I know; I edited my post.
gnolam: nice try; I ain't biting. I gotta get at least something done this weekend; outta here ...

Yeah.. I gotta do a ton of tedious Win32 API stuff... I think Im done.

yes.

23 said yes.

It actually depends..

on one hand if you are a brazillian jungle person that has never met a missionary and knows nothing about God, but still believes there is something out there that controls everything and will save you. yes, you will go to heaven.. I think in Romans it says that the if the jews sin under the law, they will be judged under the law. and if a gentile (someone who knows nothing about God) sins outside of the law, they will be judged outside of the law. but if a gentile obeys God's law without actually haveing it. they will be a law unto themselves and will go to heaven.

on the other hand. if you reject God and all and try and be good. you will burn in hell. (to be blunt)

is that what you were gonna say 23?

because it has nothin to do with your actions. its your beliefs that count.

JaTeR

I'm Christian.

(Going back a bit on the topic since I went to church this morning and missed quite a bit)

I have a very little chance of going to Church to tell the honest truth. If I do go, it's only once a week, Sunday morning.

But that doesn't make me a bad Christian, does it?

I believe you have to pray the Sinner's Prayer to be a Christian, and not just a Church go'er. I also don't define Christinanity as a religion, I define it as a relationship with God, and serving him (if God tells you to do something, like witness the "Word of God" to people, God will be with you to give you courage in the spirit and everything, heh. All you need is faith in God.)

I'll tithe whenever I can, i'll save that 10% of the money I recieve for years just to get it into that tithe bucket if I have to, heh.

Really, I want more people here to turn to Christ, but sadly it's thier choice to do so.

(BTW, If I do miss Church, I consider watching TBN (Trinity Broadcasting Network), heh.)

EDIT: 151 replies!!! Dang! Now I know why Matthew hates religion threads, because they eat his bandwith to death!

>> Did I say he was?!? Geez ... TF: I know; I edited my post.

It deosn't matter. Wouldn't you say that the bible discribes god as omnipotent and the bible can't be wrong since it was written by a omnipotent being.......

So on one hand you have my actions throughout my life, good or bad.

and on the other you have my belief in god.

And you are saying that for god this belief is MORE important than my actions?

Even if I was considered a saint but didn't believe in god I would go to hell? Where as I could be an average person who believed in God and just scrape into heaven?

Do you think this is right?

Sorry, but only a petty god would value a person's beliefs over their actions in my book.

>> Because your actions don't amount to jack.

I see. So that jesus lovin murderer is going to heaven, whereas the false idle believeing ghandi is going to hell. Some of the greatest people in history are now burning in hell. I see.

23: Yea I have read it ^^, my friend reccomended it to me.

Maybe he mad man lonely so that he could appreciate god's presense more so than if he wasnt lonely.

Ive heard alot of pastors say that church is needed but it is in fact not. The bible says you only need to accept jesus into your heart to be accepted into the kingdom of heaven.

It is possible that god purposely made a "mistake" in order for people to believe in him more fully.I mean, its kinda hard to believe in something that makes no mistakes when many of the things in the bible seem to be mistakes.

just my 2 cents...

>> I mean, its kinda hard to believe in something that makes no mistakes when many of the things in the bible seem to be mistakes.

Since we cannot guess what parts of the bible where mistakes why should we believe any of it? Maybe gods test was to see how many people would be stupid enough to believe.

Chris
Say I am a christian, who is ignoring misery, etc etc. When I die will I go to heaven?

"Say I lead a very good life and I am NOT christian, helping everyone and trying to be a good person. When I die will I go to" heaven?

Personnaly, i think that if you lead a good life, helps ppl when you can, etc then you will go to heaven.Whatever is your religion. Simple isn't it ?

I've got a basis religious education : I've read the Old Testament some time after i've discovered Bob Marley (Lot of reference in his lyrics. in fact he is the one who give me real interest in reading that book, i dunno if i would have read that but i don't regret).

on the first topic : I dunno how to tell that in english so : "Mes parents ne m'ont pas batisé pour que j'ai un reel choix sur mes croyances et ma religion" (i think someone will be able to translate)

LoHoL: let me guess!

Something like "My parents didn't baptize me because they wanted me to be able to choose my religion" ?

Note: I know absolutely no French

[EDIT]
Inputting the phrase into The Fish gives me "My parents did not batisé (must mean baptize, right?) me so that I have a reel choice on my beliefs and my religion". Yay, I was right! Go me!

just checking in before stepping out
Funny; all these questions and not one single e-mail or private message ...

go gnolam!

I'm dumb!
i feel so tired

Why are you expecting a message or email and from whom 23? o.O

<b> CALLS THE GUINESS BOOK OF WORLD RECORDS*

FASTEST GROWING THREAD EVER.
Rawking!!!!
Funny thing Matthew never stopped it.

Regards
Pradeepto

One question has gone unanswered:

If this thread is killed, will it go to heaven?

This is better taken up via e-mail. Just ask Matthew I'm also saying it in anticipation of this thread's imminent demise. Plus with e-mail I can do some research and make more intelligent and helpful replies

ank 2: Now you're just trolling. For starters, you specifically twisted what SSC said. And if you get the impression from the Bible that God can't make mistakes, yet you admit the Bible says he does, isn't it your impression, and not the Bible, that's in error?

I don't think anyone else is trolling, and (most of) these questions are pretty simple, so just PM or e-mail (if you actually give a rip ) ...

No, because heaven doesn't exist. It never did and it never will. Same goes for hell and all the other places a lot of people seem to beleive in.

Of course I might be wrong. In that case it will go to thread heaven.

I've watched this debate with some interest. For the record, I am someone who went through my life totally confident that god didn't exist and that it was all just a bunch of stories, that mutated to become religion. Then I read an article about the torah codes and my belief was severly shaken. This appeared to be the proof, that religion was valid and that the bible (at least the first few books of it) were all true.
Being very set in my ways and having been so for over nn years, I didn't rush out to church. But it's left me with the sinking feeling, that I may have backed the wrong horse.

The think that always amazes me with discussions like this, is that nobody has mentioned the codes. It's almost like religion finally got something it can scientifically claim as if not proof, then strong evidence and it's not slapping us all round the face with it. Weird...

The Bible codes are interesting, but I never put a whole lot of weight on them. There's already much better evidence out there IMHO, so the codes don't mean a whole lot to me personally (I already believe; I'm past the point where I need more proof ). I haven't looked at them in a while but if they turned out to be valid, well ... that would be very interesting.

I've looked at both arguments and found the stronger ones for the codes. As you said, it will be interesting. Just as interesting is that a lot of ppl have tried very hard to disprove them and not done a very good job of it. I know the whole subject is very speculative, but it has to be about 8 years ago when I first heard of them and the debate is still going on strong. We'll wait and see what happens, but just remember that I was "OK" and put in a good word for me

The Bible codes are bullsh*t!

You can create "foretellings" from just about any book with the techniques used by Michael Drosnin & co. To counter that criticism, he said:
"When my critics find a message about the assassination of a prime minister encrypted in Moby Dick, I'll believe them."

And so someone did. Read this page: "Assassinations Foretold in Moby Dick!"

(the rest of the page is here)

[EDIT]
Darn language filter... but you all know which book I mean

>> ank 2: Now you're just trolling. For starters, you specifically twisted what SSC said. And if you get the impression from the Bible that God can't make mistakes, yet you admit the Bible says he does, isn't it your impression, and not the Bible, that's in error?

1) I twisted nothing. Just saying it as I see it.

2) Its not an "impression", its a fact thats universially accepted by bible believers (including every religious leader I am aware of).

Heh heh

SSC said there were stories of mistakes in the Bible; you took that to mean the Bible was erroneous (and tacked on a few cheap insults as well). Those are two totally different things.

Popular opinion = correct? You yourself said God makes mistakes in the Bible, so you can't claim the Bible gives the impression he can't make mistakes. You're talking in circles in a poor attempt to rationalize your own views. This is intellectually dishonest. It's also not a universally held fact; there's tons of debate on this (as with every other religious topic).

Atheist. I have no god but myself.

I've read quite a few of these for and against arguments. One side comes up with one, they bicker about it for a while and it fails to get resolved. Then the other side does and it starts again.
I'm sure if I were an exponent of the codes, I'd come up with a counter argument, but I'm not. I haven't even looked at the subject for years.
I'd like to see it officially resolved though, not that it will change what or who I am, but I'm curious.

From the scientific and statistical side (the people with the knowledge to prove/disprove it), it has been completely disproved.
(you didn't read the link I gave you, did you? )

But the believers will continue to believe no matter what...

Anyone (christian or not) who believes in the hidden "Bible Codes" is very gullable and missing the entire point of why the Bible was written.

To think people have wasted money buying such stupid things, and then to waste time to try to refute it is just as dumb.

175 replies is enough, not like anyone is going to read every post, since they couldn't even read and understand the first post.