Author Topic: Religion chat anyone  (Read 9826 times)

Shadow D. Darkman

  • Zurvan Surfer (+2500)
  • *
  • Posts: 2630
  • "Chrono Cross" is good, and spoilers never hurt...
    • View Profile
Re: Religion chat anyone
« Reply #45 on: February 10, 2009, 11:27:35 am »
I am a Christian, you are a Jew, Muslim, Atheist, Christian that doesn't follow my way of Christianity, etc. You automatically suck because you aren't following my form of religion and will go to hell.

Ha ha, Miami Jack comes to mind when I read that.

Personally, I am not like that either. I honestly strive to be open-minded (two girls I know were once Wiccans, the other, IIRC, falling back to Christianity, while the other, I cannot truly say, other than she has never in her life been a Christian, and is not one now), even as far as refusing to follow the common Christian in religiously condemning homosexuals (as I said in another thread, a girl I'm friends with, but not one of the aforementioned two, is a lesbian, though one of the other two and a third I know also are).

Wow, so many statements in parentheses. *sigh*

Thought

  • Guru of Time Emeritus
  • God of War (+3000)
  • *
  • Posts: 3426
    • View Profile
Re: Religion chat anyone
« Reply #46 on: February 10, 2009, 12:18:25 pm »
I'm really not for ANY religion.  People believe in this "god" that supposedly created the world.  Yet if you think about the obvious things, let's see...Diseases, illnesses, corruption, etc etc...I suppose that was ALL part of his PLAN as well?  I just think every religion is pointless and doesn't do any help to the world, in fact, most of the time I see religious people they act arrogant beyond belief because they believe in someone that could be completely made up.  Hell, I don't know if it's just where I live or everywhere, but apparently Christians and people who don't have a religion have separate cemetery rules?

First, in response to religion not helping the world: Red Cross, Salvation Army, Compassion Child, etc.

Religion helps the world quite a bit. The issue, however, generally isn't if religion helps the world, it is if it helps more than it hurts. As I think most would generally agree, Zeality's stance is that it hurts far more than any help could ever make up for, whereas Daniel and I generally maintain the opposite.

Second, on the topic of disease and illness, why do you view those as bad things? How is a disease that feeds off your body any different, fundamentally, than you feeding off the planet? You don't like disease and illness, few people do, but does their existence indicate a flaw in the system? Bacteria can cause illness but bacteria are also necessary for life; you currently house a veritable crapload of bacteria and they are helping you. Indeed, if it wasn't for foreign bodies along the lines of viruses and bacteria, human life would be impossible (since we'd be lacking mitochondria, and even beyond that we wouldn’t have the intestinal bacteria that helps us process food). Viruses, though potentially deadly, have a mutagenic effect; they promote evolution by introducing new sections to our DNA.

In a changing universe, evolution is desirable, and so disease is desirable. The real question seems to be, is a changing universe fundamentally bad?

The problem with your approach is that the universe would seem to be perfectly suited for its current state regardless as to if there is a god and if there wasn't. You say X is bad, I say X is necessary for this marvelous universe and therefore X is good. But neither definitively links to the divine.

Third, yes, some sects of Christianity do have specific cemetery rules. For example, usually only members of a certain church can be buried in that church's graveyard (if there is one). However, that is a practice that to my understanding has largely fallen out of practice... though, some religious sects also strictly oppose cremation, or endorse it, depending on their religious tenants.

Let's remember one thing shall we?

Religion = hate.

It is very true; religion does equal hate. However, it should be noted that hate is not itself inherently evil.

I hate being sick, for example. I hate it when companies rip off the common worker/customer. I hate it when governments do not serve the people that they govern. Are these bad forms of hate?

Now, if I said I hate people with six fingers, you might say that such is a bad form of hate (though if I told you a six fingered man killed my father and I specifically hate that one, you might be more understanding of such hate).

Most human concepts can be good or bad based on the circumstances.

Religions generally say that "X is good" and "Y is bad." Many also then go on to say that one should love that which is good and hate that which is bad. Hence, religions promote hate. However, any and every stance that says some things are desirable and some things are undesirable promotes hate. Atheism = hate, insofar as atheism promotes the idea that religion is bad and non-religion is good. It doesn't mean that the hate itself is bad or misplaced, however.

Though on the topic of evolution; unfortunately it is one of those things that in generality seems absurd but in specific is more reasonable. I say unfortunately because it is usually talked about in generalities rather than specifics, making it usually seem absurd.

You say you can't fathom bacteria becoming a monkey. When you put it like that, it is quite understandable to believe such. One of the hardest things for me to understand was the jump from single to multiple celled organisms. Until I learned that certain single celled organisms alive today can form colonies, with specific cells within that colony performing specific actions. While not a singular entity, I can better imagine a single celled organism developing into that, and that developing into a multi-cellular organism, than I can imagine bacteria evolving into monkeys.

This isn't to say that you should thus believe evolution; rather, the absurdity decreases when one looks at the stages of progression rather than comparing two extremes. I find that the absurdity decreases to such a level as to be perfectly reasonable and convincing, but others might not agree based on the same evidence.

Building empirical evidence against a supernatural entity is moot. I think it's fair to reject the existence of such a being, but one can't build a case against it -- it can't be done. Put simply, there's much more productive things to do.

Just to qualify that statement (which I agree with), one can build a case comprised of empirical evidence against the existence of a supernatural  entity, or for it, but such cases can never be conclusive for the simple reason that there can inherently be no controls.

It is quite fair to accept or reject the existence of such a being. But it is quite unfair to insist that one's own choice is the only potentially valid choice.

Wasn't Luther being pissed off at the sale of indulgences the main idea of the 95 theses? Or was that just one of the theses? (Oh wait, ninja'd by Krispin on that one I guess)

Transubstantiation is kinda fun. Technically makes us Catholics cannibals, doesn't it? The Spanish conquistadores came over to the New World, saw people being sacrificed, and said what the hell? And then the native peoples saw the eucharist, and said what the hell? True story, I think -- I remember reading somewhere that the people of Peru took Catholics for vampiahs.

I'm not 100% positive, but I am fairly certain that the 95 theses contained more than just the sale of indulgences. That was just the impetus that started him on the road to everything contained therein. For example, I am pretty sure he rejected the catholic practice of confession as well. But that itself was the first step in a line of rejecting any and all forgiveness of sin that was Church based on not God based (among which the sale of indulgences was included).

Also, that is hilarious; I had never thought about the Jesuits in that light. Though cannibalism was one of the earliest offenses applied to Christians (though it was usually specifically baby flesh and blood that Christians were said to consume, because cannibalism itself wasn't abhorrent enough apparently).

Though, while the evidence is quite sketchy, there were some gnostic sects that may have done just that. The sources are always biased, but even Christians accused other Christian sects of consuming flesh and blood (though the one that comes to mind was attributed with consuming aborted fetuses and placenta).

HyperNerd

  • Springtime of Youth
  • Dimension Crosser (+1000)
  • *
  • Posts: 1185
  • In Guardia we trust
    • View Profile
    • Surreal Squad homepage
Re: Religion chat anyone
« Reply #47 on: February 10, 2009, 12:28:44 pm »
Personally, I believe religion was made for people to have something to believe in, something to do. And often it served a specific purpose, for example, the Jewish Kosher. This was made because, at the time, certain foods being eaten together were deadly. Thus, they made it so eating those foods together was against their religion for safety purposes. That may not apply today, so therefore I have no religion, as I don't need one.

This is how I see Monotheism.

Judaism, The first one. Had some flaws, but it was pretty cool overall.
Christianity, the sequel which is much more popular, with many fanboys, but not nessisarily better than the first.
Cathlicism, Which pretty much just repeated Christianity.


... I'm not even going to talk about the others. You see, I see them all like a sequence of movies. But I do see most things weirdly like that, so, I'm sorry if I offended anyone. Now that I've given the thread some strangeness... ALL HAIL MIGHTY GOD PAC-MAN.

Thought

  • Guru of Time Emeritus
  • God of War (+3000)
  • *
  • Posts: 3426
    • View Profile
Re: Religion chat anyone
« Reply #48 on: February 10, 2009, 12:44:58 pm »
Judaism, The first one. Had some flaws, but it was pretty cool overall.
Christianity, the sequel which is much more popular, with many fanboys, but not nessisarily better than the first.
Cathlicism, Which pretty much just repeated Christianity.

Ah yes, Catholics; those who follow the teachings of Cathol.

<.<
>.>

I've never quite understood why some people consider Catholicism to be separate from Christianity. Curiously, there are even some Catholics who do this.

nightmare975

  • Architect of Kajar
  • God of War (+3000)
  • *
  • Posts: 3263
    • View Profile
Re: Religion chat anyone
« Reply #49 on: February 10, 2009, 01:05:19 pm »
evilution = religion
evolution = science
For your information, I believe in God, because I cannot fathom bacteria becoming a monkey.

I'm sorry nightmare, I respect your position fully, but I don't think that is a very good reason to believe in god. Just because you cannot fathom something (despite the whole of observable evidence supporting it) is not a good enough reason to throw your arms up and say "God did it". My point is that whenever someone supports theology over science when they are talking about something that science can observe - theology loses. Every time. If someone believes in god, they should do it for theological reasons, not for what they perceive as a scientific reason.

Congrats, you get the go fuck yourself award.

Listen, I read up on science, I learn about science, I just hate science. To me, science is for people who want to spend their lives studying and never doing anything fun.

Not the profession for me.

Besides, what's easier to tell a child, that through centuries of evolution, bacteria became fish which in turn grew legs and lungs that in turn began to evolve into other creatures until early man was created, then they evolved into man? Or God made everything in seven days?

To summarize it: I believe in God so I can ignore science.
« Last Edit: February 10, 2009, 01:13:08 pm by nightmare975 »

ZeaLitY

  • Entity
  • End of Timer (+10000)
  • *
  • Posts: 10795
  • Spring Breeze Dancin'
    • View Profile
    • My Compendium Staff Profile
Re: Religion chat anyone
« Reply #50 on: February 10, 2009, 01:17:53 pm »
Science is what lets you experience this world. If you hate science, become an Amish in the Kalahari Desert and see how long you last. If you drove a car today, thank science.

Shadow D. Darkman

  • Zurvan Surfer (+2500)
  • *
  • Posts: 2630
  • "Chrono Cross" is good, and spoilers never hurt...
    • View Profile
Re: Religion chat anyone
« Reply #51 on: February 10, 2009, 01:41:06 pm »
I am of the opinion that science explains exactly HOW God did everything.

Religion: God did it. 'Nuff said.

Science: Here's how it was made.

Me: God did it, and here's how He did it.

EDIT: One comma too many.
« Last Edit: February 10, 2009, 02:17:44 pm by Shadow D. Darkman »

nightmare975

  • Architect of Kajar
  • God of War (+3000)
  • *
  • Posts: 3263
    • View Profile
Re: Religion chat anyone
« Reply #52 on: February 10, 2009, 02:07:33 pm »
Science is what lets you experience this world. If you hate science, become an Amish in the Kalahari Desert and see how long you last. If you drove a car today, thank science.

No, God gave man the idea to make cars. >_>

Ugh, I get science. I just hate LEARNING ABOUT IT.

Science ruins fantasy. As a writer, I prefer fantasy over science. Though science fiction is fun.
« Last Edit: February 10, 2009, 02:10:52 pm by nightmare975 »

justin3009

  • Fan Project Leader
  • God of War (+3000)
  • *
  • Posts: 3296
    • View Profile
Re: Religion chat anyone
« Reply #53 on: February 10, 2009, 02:15:05 pm »
Pretty much all around circle of nothing is right because no one can agree on anything all together.

BROJ

  • CC:DBT Dream Team
  • Errare Explorer (+1500)
  • *
  • Posts: 1567
    • View Profile
Re: Religion chat anyone
« Reply #54 on: February 10, 2009, 02:24:05 pm »
To hate science is to fear oneself and nature. Religion or not, one should cultivate his/her curiosity -- not shun it.

To quote the late Dr. Sagan:
Quote
It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.

KebreI

  • Errare Explorer (+1500)
  • *
  • Posts: 1607
  • A true man never dies, even when he's killed
    • View Profile
Re: Religion chat anyone
« Reply #55 on: February 10, 2009, 03:03:39 pm »
In all the religious debate people open up, we see something that isn't seen elsewhere. Yet this is the only time I have ever lost respect and been disappointed in someone nightmare.

A dislike in learning science is fine, in fact its normal, not everyone finds is fun or interesting. But to hate science and what it brings is to be, against Humanity and all of are accomplishment. Whether god gave the idea of the car or we learned ourselves we still have it and we use that knowledge to not only better ourselves but everyone around us. It explains new things and best of all opens new mysteries all the time.

How could it then destroy fantasy? Its just that fantasy it never true, and doesn't have to be true to be great! In fact perhaps science could even create fantasy just look at movies and books, because of science we have them to tell us of our stories of high fantasy, neo-Sci-fi, and kung fu action. You don't have to understand it, in fact I doubt anyone one person earth understands it all but you can't deign it.

Thought

  • Guru of Time Emeritus
  • God of War (+3000)
  • *
  • Posts: 3426
    • View Profile
Re: Religion chat anyone
« Reply #56 on: February 10, 2009, 03:36:39 pm »
To hate science is to fear oneself and nature. Religion or not, one should cultivate his/her curiosity -- not shun it.

Quite agree.

Science is what lets you experience this world. If you hate science, become an Amish in the Kalahari Desert and see how long you last. If you drove a car today, thank science.

Actually, Science is what lets one understand this world. Science has nothing to do with experiencing the Moonlight Sonata or playing Chrono Trigger (though science could certainly be applied).

Also, if you drove a car today, thank a Scottsman first. Then thank science.

placidchap

  • Temporal Warrior (+900)
  • *
  • Posts: 905
    • View Profile
Re: Religion chat anyone
« Reply #57 on: February 10, 2009, 03:39:08 pm »
The Entity should just drop the temp and kill all of us hu-mons off.  That would solve this debate.

chrono eric

  • Dimension Crosser (+1000)
  • *
  • Posts: 1161
    • View Profile
Re: Religion chat anyone
« Reply #58 on: February 10, 2009, 03:56:33 pm »
Congrats, you get the go fuck yourself award.

I find it remarkable that my entire post was cordial with regards to you, but it is in a thread about religion that conjures up such spiteful and hateful remarks from people. Nowhere in my post did I say "believing in god is stupid" or "you are stupid for believing in god", I said that believing in god for a perceived flaw in a scientific theory (even though no such flaw exists) is not a very good reason to believe in god compared with believing in god for a theological or philosophical reason. I myself also believe in god, although my entheogenic inspired perception of "god" is so vastly different from that of any world religions that it is almost pointless to even refer to such a concept as a "god".

But since I was cordial to you, and told you that I fully respected your position, and you responded with "go fuck yourself", you have successfully closed down any future cordial discussion and I can confidently reply to the following quotes in a manner that is more fitting.

Listen, I read up on science, I learn about science

Apparently not well enough.

To me, science is for people who want to spend their lives studying and never doing anything fun.

For most scientists, they love what they do and so they consider it "fun". I can relate though. I worked as a scientist for two years in a genetics lab doing the same damn thing every day and it became mind numbingly boring after awhile. I too realized that a job in a lab was not for me, and thus decided to go down a medical path. Something which would be much more rewarding to me. My point is everybody has an ideal place in the world, just because you don't find science fun doesn't mean other people waste their lives doing it.

And from a theological perspective, if you truly admire god - would it not be one of the ultimate acts of praise and worship to want to study and be fascinated by the nature of his grand creation? That's one of the reasons I will never understand many religious people's aversion to science.

Besides, what's easier to tell a child, that through centuries of evolution, bacteria became fish which in turn grew legs and lungs that in turn began to evolve into other creatures until early man was created, then they evolved into man? Or God made everything in seven days?

And the grand finale:

To summarize it: I believe in God so I can ignore science.

It is astounding to me that people think god and science are not compatible. It is also astounding to me that in discussions about the existence of god the theory of evolution is inevitably brought up by people that neither fully understand nor care to understand evolutionary theory. Evolutionary theory in no way has anything to do with whether or not god exists, it just has to do with the concept of life changing over time. I ask you, why couldn't god exist and evolution be his intended way to create life? Is it not a perfect act of creation, that (to quote The Origin of Species) "endless forms most beautiful are continually being evolved"? Is it not an ideal act of creation to employ a mechanism in which life can be adaptable to a changing environment? So that god doesn't have to say "oops, I screwed up" and pop new life-forms into existence after a global extinction event? From a theological perspective, isn't evolution a testament to the power and knowledge of a divine creator?
« Last Edit: February 10, 2009, 03:58:49 pm by chrono eric »

FouCapitan

  • Black Wind Agent (+600)
  • *
  • Posts: 626
  • Whatever it is, I'm against it.
    • View Profile
Re: Religion chat anyone
« Reply #59 on: February 10, 2009, 04:07:59 pm »
The Entity should just drop the temp and kill all of us hu-mons off.  That would solve this debate.

I'm sorry, I don't get this reasoning...  People are arguing over something so they should all die, argument solved?

...Yeah I definitely don't get that...


Also it was only a matter of time before science found its way into a religion discussion.  The two always find each other, like Godzilla and the military.

I don't see the point in going against science.  I mean, you get facts, and then okay, what's the point in arguing, they're facts.  Facts by definition can't be wrong.  The problem is when theory tries to present itself as fact, and this happens all the fucking time.  We get the big bang theory, we have some supporting evidence, but nothing concrete and absolute for it.  So now there's a theory that has a good chance of being true, but is not 100% and cannot easily be studied for more answers.  But now this theory throws itself around as fact, saying here I am, I'm truth, stop believing in this because I replace it.

Now I'm not going to pretend to be an expert on the facts, and I'm not going to go to wiki-itmustbetruebecauseireaditontheinternet-pedia to scavange support for my argument.  This is just a layman's point of view on it.

So all in all science is good, but theories and discoveries sometimes take themselves too seriously.  How often does it seem like we're at the pinnacle of science only to discover we were dead wrong about something?  It's less evident looking back only 10-20 years, but go back 100 years and see how much technology, laws of physics, universal exploration, and even knowledge of our own planet has changed.  Every decade to every year we're discovering something new, and many times it totally debunks something old.  So basically, science in itself is prone to error, so it shouldn't be defended as though its not.  A bit of skepticism doesn't hurt.

Even evolution hasn't found solid ground completely.  Yeah, I'm a Christian who isn't completely against the theory of evolution, surprise surprise.  If you think this makes me hippocritical, fuck yourself.  There's obviously changes occuring within a species through gene selection and survival of the fittest.  Monkeys to men though?  Somehow I still doubt that's exactly what happened.  If mankind evolved so smart and dominant, why didn't any other species on earth?  Several other species have had ample time to evolve, and there are plenty of other intelligent animals on the earth, but none come close to mankind.  The most advanced use of tools outside of humanity is seen in otters using rocks and some monkeys using sticks.  So why only humans?  We're special, we're insanely advanced compared to the rest of the planet, and have been so for as long as history records.  Even thousands of years before recorded history we find tribal remains that used handmade weapons and tools to hunt and gather, still far beyond any other animals.

So why is humanity special in this aspect?  Why do we create, imagine, write, type, dominate and so on?  We can go with Lavos' influence, or just shug our shoulders and say God did it.  Either way science hasn't found the answer yet (or if it has I haven't heard it yet).