WWN's Debate Topic: Religion and the Supernatural

WWN's Social Lounge. The place to come and chill out for a relaxed conversation about life and stuff, or some more serious debates.
User avatar
Dragonite
Rank: My face is beaming.
Location: the netherlands(mostly)

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by Dragonite » Thu Aug 21, 2014 3:25 am

That's what I meant with human psychology/human orgins being a argument against Christianity earlier ML. You believe in a fall of sorts,and christian theology heavily leans of us don't deserving much based on our actions vs. what got intended for us.

But if remember correctly you don't take the literal young earth angle. With modern knowledge, there's isn't any point that can be called a ''fall''. And by now means I deny humanity has shortcomings. However, the ancient world of the bible was ''fallen'', but also our far hunter-gatherer ancestors, and before that... our primate ancestor, of which one branch became modern humanity. Basically all the typical ''fallen'' attributes of humanity and current animal kingdom are far older then humanity itself. Survival wasn't a cakewalk, and humans today aren't really fine-tuned for peaceful coexistence(still possible, just several aspects of the human mind make it a lot harder).With this, humanity being ''fallen'' in any means, and all claims following it, about sickness being caused by it, and us being judged for the resurrection, fall flat as well. I probably haven't convinced you of anything, but you probably see what the domino effect is I'm describing here.

User avatar
MysteriousLad
Rank: Mysterious President
Location: In your computer.

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by MysteriousLad » Thu Aug 21, 2014 3:43 am

Dragonite wrote:That's what I meant with human psychology/human orgins being a argument against Christianity earlier ML. You believe in a fall of sorts,and christian theology heavily leans of us don't deserving much based on our actions vs. what got intended for us.

But if remember correctly you don't take the literal young earth angle. With modern knowledge, there's isn't any point that can be called a ''fall''. And by now means I deny humanity has shortcomings. However, the ancient world of the bible was ''fallen'', but also our far hunter-gatherer ancestors, and before that... our primate ancestor, of which one branch became modern humanity. Basically all the typical ''fallen'' attributes of humanity and current animal kingdom are far older then humanity itself. Survival wasn't a cakewalk, and humans today aren't really fine-tuned for peaceful coexistence(still possible, just several aspects of the human mind make it a lot harder).With this, humanity being ''fallen'' in any means, and all claims following it, about sickness being caused by it, and us being judged for the resurrection, fall flat as well. I probably haven't convinced you of anything, but you probably see what the domino effect is I'm describing here.
Ah, I understand I'll post something later on tis.
"i put on my robe and wizard hat" ~Pkdragon
"rocks fall everyone dies" ~HPD
Welcome to the optimistic world of WWN :D

And logic doesn't work on MysteriousLad... ~Kireato
Wait, wait, wait.

Organized crime is selling bagels on television? Since when? ~Dragon Fogel

User avatar
Terragent
Rank: Cussing Aussie
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Contact:

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by Terragent » Thu Aug 21, 2014 1:34 pm

Thanks for not reading any of the links I provided. It really shows that you care. (evidence does not favour any of the gospels being written by their traditionally attributed authors)

And, uh, your reply to my Calvin & Hobbes objection was farcical. Allow me:
Yes god would need a cause if he had a beginning but he doesn't so he needs no cause.
And why is that, exactly?

(ps sven I am totally okay with your embrace of Atenism. After all, it's pretty hard to come up with a more logical object of worship than the source of all life and energy on our planet)

User avatar
MysteriousLad
Rank: Mysterious President
Location: In your computer.

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by MysteriousLad » Thu Aug 21, 2014 5:27 pm

Terragent wrote:Thanks for not reading any of the links I provided. It really shows that you care. (evidence does not favour any of the gospels being written by their traditionally attributed authors)

And, uh, your reply to my Calvin & Hobbes objection was farcical. Allow me:
Yes god would need a cause if he had a beginning but he doesn't so he needs no cause.
And why is that, exactly?

(ps sven I am totally okay with your embrace of Atenism. After all, it's pretty hard to come up with a more logical object of worship than the source of all life and energy on our planet)
Because:
1.Logic (If something has no start, it has no end and if it never began it never needed a cause)
2.More logic (If everything in this Universe has a cause like you suggest, that would play no influence on God whatsoever. Why? He's not in this universe and hence doesn't have to abide by it's laws. Just as you don't have to abide by India's laws if you are in England.)
3.Even more logic (He made the laws, so he doesn't have to abide by them either as he is the highest power everywhere. He has more power than the laws and can chnage them at will.)

We will have to agree to disagree on that point.

I did infact read the articles and I disagree with their statements and it's easy to prove your point with a quick google. Look let's take this for instance: http://www.ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/REALWROT.HTM
"i put on my robe and wizard hat" ~Pkdragon
"rocks fall everyone dies" ~HPD
Welcome to the optimistic world of WWN :D

And logic doesn't work on MysteriousLad... ~Kireato
Wait, wait, wait.

Organized crime is selling bagels on television? Since when? ~Dragon Fogel

User avatar
Terragent
Rank: Cussing Aussie
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Contact:

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by Terragent » Thu Aug 21, 2014 7:39 pm

So, uh, why is God infinite? Why does God not have a beginning? I'm not sure exactly where or how that's been established. Aren't you just assuming that because it's convenient for your argument? You can't just change the rules whenever your argument contradicts itself - or rather, you can, but it doesn't leave your argument with much persuasive power.

More importantly, how does this argument in any way support the existence of your god over any other god traditionally ascribed omnipotence, immanence, etc etc etc? Why are the Christians correct but not, say, the Muslims or the Jews? Why not the Hindus, why not Buddhists?

Your linked article was refuting a completely different point, that the gospels had been written in the third century. I quote: "The Gospel of Mark is commonly dated about the year 65-70 in conjunction with the destruction of the Temple of Jerusalem." - which would seem to be in broad agreement with Wikipedia - there are similar agreements about almost every single concrete date and time. The article also goes to enormous pains to point out that authorship is an extremely broad concept and extricate itself from having to make any substantial commitment by claiming that it does lie with the traditional authors. I think I'll take the consensus of modern scholarship for now.

User avatar
MysteriousLad
Rank: Mysterious President
Location: In your computer.

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by MysteriousLad » Thu Aug 21, 2014 8:14 pm

Terragent wrote:So, uh, why is God infinite? Why does God not have a beginning? I'm not sure exactly where or how that's been established. Aren't you just assuming that because it's convenient for your argument? You can't just change the rules whenever your argument contradicts itself - or rather, you can, but it doesn't leave your argument with much persuasive power.
How and where did I change my argument? I'm confused on that point. It would be
necessary for the to be an infinite entity some where; A God(Creation) or an infinite cycle of universes. Which you choose to argument is yor choice but some where we need to have a finite entity(ies). I didn't change the rules aswell; Everything that has a beginning has a cause, fact. Now if you were to believe in a creator (any creator not necessarily the Christian God) it would have to be a timeless, finite entity. The Bible says God is finite so I'm not randomly labeling him finite, it's in the Bible and logically he would have to be finite. He is finite because he is, how the heck am I meant to know everything? It's the same as thinking up a colour which you have never seen before in your head, not a new shade of a colour a completely new primary colour. The same goes with God he's incomprehenseable except what we can figure out with the Bible and philosophy. I'm not assuming he's infinite, if there is a God he is infinite.
Terragent wrote:More importantly, how does this argument in any way support the existence of your god over any other god traditionally ascribed omnipotence, immanence, etc etc etc? Why are the Christians correct but not, say, the Muslims or the Jews? Why not the Hindus, why not Buddhists?
It doesn't argue for the Christian God, your correct, it argues for a God. The Jews would be correct if my God exsists to quickly point that out. Same god different view of salvation and all explained in te Bible. Why would my God be correct, once again because Jesus. Jews predicted the coming of him even out of the Bible's proohecies and believed it for thousands of years. Funnily a man appears and stars fuffilling all of them. Even people who didn't believe him wanted him dead as he was taking away their power and traditions: the pharisees and other Jewish scholars of the
time. Other religions haven't had something like this happen. Also man has a tendency to want to control as much as they can, with Christianity this isn't the case. In christianity you admit you cannot save yourself and that your a sinner and accept the grace of God as Jesus died for our sins, you cannot earn salvation, no you get it for free. Other religions have a system which you earn salvation or a better life.
Terragent wrote:Your linked article was refuting a completely different point, that the gospels had been written in the third century. I quote: "The Gospel of Mark is commonly dated about the year 65-70 in conjunction with the destruction of the Temple of Jerusalem." - which would seem to be in broad agreement with Wikipedia - there are similar agreements about almost every single concrete date and time. The article also goes to enormous pains to point out that authorship is an extremely broad concept and extricate itself from having to make any substantial commitment by claiming that it does lie with the traditional authors. I think I'll take the consensus of modern scholarship for now.
I also quote
My Link wrote:So did Sts. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John write the Gospels? Is the sacred author also the saint? Remember only St. Matthew and St. John were among the 12 Apostles. We must keep in mind that the ancient world, authorship was designated in several ways: First, the author was clearly the individual who actually wrote the text with his own pen. Second, the individual who dictated the text to a secretary or scribe was still considered the author. Third, the individual was still considered the author if he only provided the ideas or if the text were written in accord with his though and in his spirit even though a "ghost writer" did the actual composition. In the broadest sense, the individual was even considered the author if the work was written in his tradition; for example, David is given credit for the psalms even though clearly he did not write all of the psalms.
and it continues on, your misquoting me either to make my arguments look bad or you didn't read the whole argument. I hope its the latter.
"i put on my robe and wizard hat" ~Pkdragon
"rocks fall everyone dies" ~HPD
Welcome to the optimistic world of WWN :D

And logic doesn't work on MysteriousLad... ~Kireato
Wait, wait, wait.

Organized crime is selling bagels on television? Since when? ~Dragon Fogel

User avatar
MysteriousLad
Rank: Mysterious President
Location: In your computer.

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by MysteriousLad » Thu Aug 21, 2014 8:55 pm

Dragonite wrote:That's what I meant with human psychology/human orgins being a argument against Christianity earlier ML. You believe in a fall of sorts,and christian theology heavily leans of us don't deserving much based on our actions vs. what got intended for us.
Yes, I believe in a fall along with all Jews and Christians. We don't deserve much as we sin, breaking the rules of the highest power in everything (I refrain from saying universe as he is not part of our universe.). He made us for a perfect relation with him but we turn from him and sin. Therefor we deserve death, God hates the fact the we sin and has great sorrow because of it. So he made the mosaic-law to show us what sin is and to get our sins forgiven with sacrifices and laws; This is what the Jews live by. But, he promised a time would come were all our sins are forgiven; Jesus. Jesus lived perfectly and therefor was a "perfect sacrifice" and he died for our sins forgiving all of them if you choose to accept him as your saviour and accept the sacrifice. God did this as he loves everyone and wants everyone to live with him, yeah we don't deserve it, but he is so graceful to forgive us anyway.
Dragonite wrote:But if remember correctly you don't take the literal young earth angle. With modern knowledge, there's isn't any point that can be called a ''fall''. And by now means I deny humanity has shortcomings.
Yeah, I believe that Genesis now translated "days" (In Hebrew language the word now translated as day can also be translated as period of time.) stands for periods of time and not literal 7 days. The fall is the first time man sinned, wether Adam and Eve are to be taken literally or as a parable I don't know but I edge to the first option.
So you now believe humanity ha no shortcomings? That means you believe we are perfect and that would mean stuff like rape and murder can't be called "wrong". I'll come to this point later.
[/quote="Dragonite"]However, the ancient world of the bible was ''fallen'', but also our far hunter-gatherer ancestors, and before that... our primate ancestor, of which one branch became modern humanity. Basically all the typical ''fallen'' attributes of humanity and current animal kingdom are far older then humanity itself.[/quote]
This always an interesting topic, wether or not animal death was "fallen" is up for debate. Death came to humanity from the spiritual fall but animals have no "soul" so animals dying may have been seen as perfect in God's eyes. This is a great topic to research quickly and I won't go into it here. As for the "ancestor" I beg us not to have an Evolution debate as they suck as no one can win. I am an OEC (Old Earth Creationist) who believes Micro-Evolution, as that can be observed, macro-evolution can't be. But anyway, these ancestors then came after the fall.
Another interesting view from Theistic Evolutionists is that god let life evolve and then chose our race to be his chosen people an he "breathed" his spirit into us. So this topic also makes for an interesting read.
What other "fallen" attributes do you mean except for animal death.
Dragonite wrote: Survival wasn't a cakewalk, and humans today aren't really fine-tuned for peaceful coexistence(still possible, just several aspects of the human mind make it a lot harder).With this, humanity being ''fallen'' in any means, and all claims following it, about sickness being caused by it, and us being judged for the resurrection, fall flat as well. I probably haven't convinced you of anything, but you probably see what the domino effect is I'm describing here.
Human nature is to sin and wage wars yes as we are in a fallen world living as a fallen race. Yet all people (well most) think that there is something wrong with the world. Ask some random people on the street what is wrong with the world and they will give 3 possible answers:
1.Some sort of suffering
2.In the news recently (Politics, Wars, Economy)
3.Not thinking well and saying something like "broken legs" or "my neighbour".
If they answer 2 or 3 you can ask; "So if ... wasn't in the world the world we be perfect?"
Then they usually get the point and they say something like "sickness" or "pain". It's funny how we think the world isn't perfect even though we have known nothing better. Also a naturalistic universe would have no morals, there would be no "right" or "wrong". Yet we have such a strong opinion on precisely those 2 words. If someone rapes someone we say it's "wrong" but in a naturalistic universe, who are we to tell them that if there is no such thing as "wrong".
Most people strive for fulfilment, trying to feel fulfilled and try to get better and more. Yet it doesn't stop, we are always looking for something better; more money, fame, drugs you name it. It just looks like humans have something wired into them making them want to be fulfilled, something the Bible can explain. We were made for a perfect relationship with God but we have fallen so we try to replace god with whatever we can, without success as only God is perfect.
As for illness blame the Devil for that, he has tainted the world and effectively rules it.

Judgement will work like this; all are raised from the dead and judged for everything they have ever thought and done. We are all guilty of sin so we need God's forgiveness through Jesus or through the law (Only applies to Jews as said in the Bible). If you have any sin you fail the judgement and what happens next is another great debate to read on. But if you had accepted Christ then your sins were forgiven and you will live on the new Earth. There will likely also be rewards depending on how much "righteousness (good)" you did on Earth but in the end all will be free of anything "unperfect" so no sorrow, pain etc.
"i put on my robe and wizard hat" ~Pkdragon
"rocks fall everyone dies" ~HPD
Welcome to the optimistic world of WWN :D

And logic doesn't work on MysteriousLad... ~Kireato
Wait, wait, wait.

Organized crime is selling bagels on television? Since when? ~Dragon Fogel

User avatar
Sven

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by Sven » Fri Aug 22, 2014 1:26 am

terragent is trying to explain to you that if you're going to talk about gods as an academic you're going to have to follow an academic's rules. it's very blatant that you aren't and that you probably should revisit most of his posts and dig through the links + sources of the links he's provided. if you just continue to repeat what the two books you've read and your youth leader have indoctrinated you with terragent is just going to continue posting the same things until you understand.
---
ps terr i looked some more stuff up on ahkenaten and jeez totally 90% political with a 10% that special kind of crazy, it seems it was somewhat a flop with the rest of the ruling class (small models of the royal family in the style of monkeys + old gods being present in homes particularly gods that dealt with death, etc). it also seemed to insist that the only way to the aten was through ahkenaten which is like you know, very bad in a society that was used to concrete iconography surrounding death instead of this "yeah only way to god is by honouring your pharaoh yo". seems it didn't really take root from what i can tell, and this is from archeological stuff only and not the writings afterwards.

User avatar
MysteriousLad
Rank: Mysterious President
Location: In your computer.

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by MysteriousLad » Fri Aug 22, 2014 1:44 am

Sven wrote:terragent is trying to explain to you that if you're going to talk about gods as an academic you're going to have to follow an academic's rules. it's very blatant that you aren't and that you probably should revisit most of his posts and dig through the links + sources of the links he's provided. if you just continue to repeat what the two books you've read and your youth leader have indoctrinated you with terragent is just going to continue posting the same things until you understand.
---
ps terr i looked some more stuff up on ahkenaten and jeez totally 90% political with a 10% that special kind of crazy, it seems it was somewhat a flop with the rest of the ruling class (small models of the royal family in the style of monkeys + old gods being present in homes particularly gods that dealt with death, etc). it also seemed to insist that the only way to the aten was through ahkenaten which is like you know, very bad in a society that was used to concrete iconography surrounding death instead of this "yeah only way to god is by honouring your pharaoh yo". seems it didn't really take root from what i can tell, and this is from archeological stuff only and not the writings afterwards.
I am not an academic, I'm 15 for gods sake. But I do research all this info myself and my youth leade really won't be any help. There is no reason to blindly follow all he says, no I figure it out myself. I had another read of the links and I may respond to it, but I probaly won't as I'm not a scholar.
Terragent knows alot more than me most likely as he is older than me, but that doesn't mean I can attempt to establish my beliefs. I always love getting new challenges against my beliefs as it then gives me something to look into and research. The way I think is very well represented by the quote in my first post.
"i put on my robe and wizard hat" ~Pkdragon
"rocks fall everyone dies" ~HPD
Welcome to the optimistic world of WWN :D

And logic doesn't work on MysteriousLad... ~Kireato
Wait, wait, wait.

Organized crime is selling bagels on television? Since when? ~Dragon Fogel

User avatar
Dragonite
Rank: My face is beaming.
Location: the netherlands(mostly)

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by Dragonite » Sat Aug 23, 2014 11:52 pm

Haven't forgotten this, bit busy lately and this is focused stuff. May write something later.

ThunderWalker
Rank: Elf
Location: Netherlands

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by ThunderWalker » Sun Aug 24, 2014 7:09 am

A religion topic. I'll try to be serious for once in those, as normally I lie and say I'm a Satanist just for the sake of trolling.

If God exists, well...
Image
This sums up my thoughts quite perfectly, at least regarding monotheistical deities. I do not believe one exists, at any rate. And there's certainly no Devil, who renders the entire point of monotheism moot to begin with (because when the Devil has a lot of power, he's a second god, and as such, it becomes polytheism).

Neither do I believe there is nothing, as I believe we reincarnate one day - as a human or an animal or whatever. During, as well as in between these lives, I believe we learn from mistakes made in the past and not make them again in the grand scheme of things.

However, since many of us forget our past lives, and are bound by instincts just as much as your average pet, we will still make those mistakes, and it takes a long time to grow past this point. There is no Devil responsible for us having them, they are hardwired in our brain as our DNA isn't overly different from the average monkey. We evolved out of monkeys, after all.

Now, talking about instincts...
People who behave themselves out of fear for God, miss the point of living and learning in the first place. One should naturally behave, regardless of whatever deity is looking over this planet (if any). People saying they are acting one way or another because it's written in the Bible they should, do not act upon their own judgement. Not acting upon ones own judgement of what's good and bad, but instead following the leaders can be disastrous, and the Bible fulfilling the role of the leader is no different. This partially proves not all humans have a moral compass, even if the true danger of this does not become visible until one is put in a position of power, or when society splits.

-

Imagine the situation of a Group A, initially random people, which now are the Guards, led by a Guard Captain. Group B are initially random people as well, but now the Prisoners from a foreign country/other religion/whatever.
The Guard Captain constantly tells the Guards that they are superior to the Prisoners. He himself does not have any problem giving beatings, to torture and murder, even if said Prisoners are children. They are inferior to him, inferior to animals, and worth less than the dirt he walks on, and he can do with them as he pleases (in his eyes). At a point in time, more and more Guards will follow his example, especially if the sentiment of superiority is widespread, even before Group A and Group B were put in their current positions. Eventually, it leads to absolute atrocities, in the name of whatever ideology. Very few of the Guards will actually object to what is happening. In the end, most of them are sheep.

The Bible fulfilled this role in the past, and let's not get started on the Nazi's or the North Korean prison camps.
The sins and atrocities we commit are depending on how we grow up and whether we decide to burn our moral compass to ashes.

As such, I do not believe in a God who is going to judge us upon our sins. If a God exist, he doesn't judge. There is no hell, there is no heaven, even though the time you spend in between lives will be likely much more pleasant if you do not commit atrocities.

I also do not believe in Jesus that somehow becomes responsible for our own sins of all things and takes them upon him with his sacrifice and will to forgive. He was just a spiritual man with a lot of wisdom that managed to gather a cult around him (partially helped by the time and a lack of general scientific knowledge, while an universal language (Latin) as well as the possibility to write existed). Furthermore, Jesus died young, inspiring his followers and fertilizing the soil for the cult to grow into a large religion.
However, he would turn his grave upside down if he knows what people did in his name later on, especially the Thirty Years' War. Humans did not learn from his death, not at all, and at this point in history it became very clear that humans would never learn. But Jesus is not unique in what he did, except in the sense that he allowed his cult to grow into a religion that blossomed for many centuries to come.

Every soul has to follow his own path to wisdom and enlightenment, throughout many lives, living as humans, animals and aliens alike.
My sig is a void.

User avatar
MysteriousLad
Rank: Mysterious President
Location: In your computer.

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by MysteriousLad » Sun Aug 24, 2014 5:19 pm

I myself am sometimes tempted to say I'm a satanist or God sucks in a religion topic full of fundamentalist/"hard-core" Christians, it is just about the most entertaining things to do on the internet.
ThunderWalker wrote:This sums up my thoughts quite perfectly, at least regarding monotheistical deities. I do not believe one exists, at any rate. And there's certainly no Devil, who renders the entire point of monotheism moot to begin with (because when the Devil has a lot of power, he's a second god, and as such, it becomes polytheism).

Your giving two arguments here;
1.The Problem of Evil.
2.The devil being a God.
You have probably heard this argument, for the first "problem" before and hence probably refute it but I will quote it from it's maker anyway here it is:

Alvin Platinga:
"A world containing creatures who are significantly free (and freely perform more good than evil actions) is more valuable, all else being equal, than a world containing no free creatures at all. Now God can create free creatures, but He can't cause or determine them to do only what is right. For if He does so, then they aren't significantly free after all; they do not do what is right freely. To create creatures capable of moral good, therefore, He must create creatures capable of moral evil; and He can't give these creatures the freedom to perform evil and at the same time prevent them from doing so. As it turned out, sadly enough, some of the free creatures God created went wrong in the exercise of their freedom; this is the source of moral evil. The fact that free creatures sometimes go wrong, however, counts neither against God's omnipotence nor against His goodness; for He could have forestalled the occurrence of moral evil only by removing the possibility of moral good."

I can I attempt to discuss this but I won't pretend I know what philosopher have been struggling with for centuries.

Now I can say with certainty that if you search the Bible you will see Satan is far from a god. He is an angel (named Lucifer) who was amongst the highest if the angels. He wanted the worship which angels gave to God for himself so he rebelled. He has no power over us no matter how much he tries to deceive us, and that's just what he tries to do (and what he does) deceive and tempt. He is not a God, for from it.
Neither do I believe there is nothing, as I believe we reincarnate one day - as a human or an animal or whatever. During, as well as in between these lives, I believe we learn from mistakes made in the past and not make them again in the grand scheme of things.
No comments here.
However, since many of us forget our past lives, and are bound by instincts just as much as your average pet, we will still make those mistakes, and it takes a long time to grow past this point. There is no Devil responsible for us having them, they are hardwired in our brain as our DNA isn't overly different from the average monkey. We evolved out of monkeys, after all.
I can correct that last sentence for you; We may have evolved out of monkeys, after all. (Please, lets not start an evolution debate, they never end as neither side can be proven correct. As you may already know I'm an Old Earth Creationist but if some undeniable evidence pops up that can change. Once again I always apply the quote at the top of my OP to everything I "believe". If you really want to discuss this it's an open forum so you may but I could make a later debate specifically about this.)
Now, talking about instincts...
People who behave themselves out of fear for God, miss the point of living and learning in the first place.
Very correct, they do. I don't live or believe out fear in fact I'm just living a good life guided by the Bible (well, trying). Jesus+Nothing=Salvation, I don't need to do anything except truly except accept god's Free gift.
One should naturally behave, regardless of whatever deity is looking over this planet (if any). People saying they are acting one way or another because it's written in the Bible they should, do not act upon their own judgement.
Hmm... Lets say there is an all powerful creator of all. That would make him the highest power of all right? So, if he commands something wouldn't it be wise to obey, just like you obey the law?
What you're saying is everyone, ignore all rules and do whatever you want and ignore all authority. I believe that would be treason to the highest power of all as it means you're making yourself more important than him.
Not acting upon ones own judgement of what's good and bad, but instead following the leaders can be disastrous, and the Bible fulfilling the role of the leader is no different.
Are you an Anarchist, as this also is their belief? Leaders guide us an keep order and make stuff "good" (well they try at least, that's the quality of a good leader). Also people who blindly follow and believe something are Fundamentalists, which I dislike. If you believe something you should at least think why and that is what I do. Bad leaders lead to disaster.
This partially proves not all humans have a moral compass, even if the true danger of this does not become visible until one is put in a position of power, or when society splits.
True, but as you will later explain this is influenced by experiences.
Imagine the situation of a Group A, initially random people, which now are the Guards, led by a Guard Captain. Group B are initially random people as well, but now the Prisoners from a foreign country/other religion/whatever.
The Guard Captain constantly tells the Guards that they are superior to the Prisoners. He himself does not have any problem giving beatings, to torture and murder, even if said Prisoners are children. They are inferior to him, inferior to animals, and worth less than the dirt he walks on, and he can do with them as he pleases (in his eyes). At a point in time, more and more Guards will follow his example, especially if the sentiment of superiority is widespread, even before Group A and Group B were put in their current positions. Eventually, it leads to absolute atrocities, in the name of whatever ideology. Very few of the Guards will actually object to what is happening. In the end, most of them are sheep.
Correct.
The Bible fulfilled this role in the past, and let's not get started on the Nazi's or the North Korean prison camps.
The Bible doesn't prevent people from doing bad stuff, it says what you shouldn't do, doesn't stop you. Like the law in every country, it doesn't stop you from breaking them. Something else enforces them.
The sins and atrocities we commit are depending on how we grow up and whether we decide to burn our moral compass to ashes.
Yes, but we all sin however we grow up. People burn their moral compasses by sinning and this is also in the Bible. You basically agreeing with a lot I'm saying.
As such, I do not believe in a God who is going to judge us upon our sins. If a God exist, he doesn't judge.
Wait, why wouldn't he judge?
There is no hell, there is no heaven, even though the time you spend in between lives will be likely much more pleasant if you do not commit atrocities.

I also do not believe in Jesus that somehow becomes responsible for our own sins of all things and takes them upon him with his sacrifice and will to forgive. He was just a spiritual man with a lot of wisdom that managed to gather a cult around him (partially helped by the time and a lack of general scientific knowledge, while an universal language (Latin) as well as the possibility to write existed). Furthermore, Jesus died young, inspiring his followers and fertilizing the soil for the cult to grow into a large religion.
However, he would turn his grave upside down if he knows what people did in his name later on, especially the Thirty Years' War. Humans did not learn from his death, not at all, and at this point in history it became very clear that humans would never learn. But Jesus is not unique in what he did, except in the sense that he allowed his cult to grow into a religion that blossomed for many centuries to come.
Human's never learn and that is why he died, others didn't claim he would die for our sins. No, he did, he claimed he was God. As humans never learn (The Jewish law) god sent his only son by grace and mercy to forgive as we are all (sorry) sinners who are stubborn and don't learn from all our mistakes.
Every soul has to follow his own path to wisdom and enlightenment, throughout many lives, living as humans, animals and aliens alike.
Correct, God saves at a personal level and you get to know him through your own seeking and search for wisdom.
"i put on my robe and wizard hat" ~Pkdragon
"rocks fall everyone dies" ~HPD
Welcome to the optimistic world of WWN :D

And logic doesn't work on MysteriousLad... ~Kireato
Wait, wait, wait.

Organized crime is selling bagels on television? Since when? ~Dragon Fogel

ThunderWalker
Rank: Elf
Location: Netherlands

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by ThunderWalker » Sun Aug 24, 2014 8:32 pm

MysteriousLad wrote:I myself am sometimes tempted to say I'm a satanist or God sucks in a religion topic full of fundamentalist/"hard-core" Christians, it is just about the most entertaining things to do on the internet.
ThunderWalker wrote:This sums up my thoughts quite perfectly, at least regarding monotheistical deities. I do not believe one exists, at any rate. And there's certainly no Devil, who renders the entire point of monotheism moot to begin with (because when the Devil has a lot of power, he's a second god, and as such, it becomes polytheism).

Your giving two arguments here;
1.The Problem of Evil.
2.The devil being a God.
You have probably heard this argument, for the first "problem" before and hence probably refute it but I will quote it from it's maker anyway here it is:

Alvin Platinga:
"A world containing creatures who are significantly free (and freely perform more good than evil actions) is more valuable, all else being equal, than a world containing no free creatures at all. Now God can create free creatures, but He can't cause or determine them to do only what is right. For if He does so, then they aren't significantly free after all; they do not do what is right freely. To create creatures capable of moral good, therefore, He must create creatures capable of moral evil; and He can't give these creatures the freedom to perform evil and at the same time prevent them from doing so. As it turned out, sadly enough, some of the free creatures God created went wrong in the exercise of their freedom; this is the source of moral evil. The fact that free creatures sometimes go wrong, however, counts neither against God's omnipotence nor against His goodness; for He could have forestalled the occurrence of moral evil only by removing the possibility of moral good."

I can I attempt to discuss this but I won't pretend I know what philosopher have been struggling with for centuries.
Responding here would indeed lead to a pointless argument but it will be indirectly touched upon near the end of this post.
Now I can say with certainty that if you search the Bible you will see Satan is far from a god. He is an angel (named Lucifer) who was amongst the highest if the angels. He wanted the worship which angels gave to God for himself so he rebelled. He has no power over us no matter how much he tries to deceive us, and that's just what he tries to do (and what he does) deceive and tempt. He is not a God, for from it.
That makes him a deity nonetheless, even if not on the same rank as God himself (hence the lack of a capital). To draw a (not entirely correct) parallel with Greek mythology, God is Zeus and the Devil is Hades. Zeus is ranked above Hades without a doubt, but that doesn't mean Hades isn't a god/deity.
However, since many of us forget our past lives, and are bound by instincts just as much as your average pet, we will still make those mistakes, and it takes a long time to grow past this point. There is no Devil responsible for us having them, they are hardwired in our brain as our DNA isn't overly different from the average monkey. We evolved out of monkeys, after all.
I can correct that last sentence for you; We may have evolved out of monkeys, after all. (Please, lets not start an evolution debate, they never end as neither side can be proven correct. As you may already know I'm an Old Earth Creationist but if some undeniable evidence pops up that can change. Once again I always apply the quote at the top of my OP to everything I "believe". If you really want to discuss this it's an open forum so you may but I could make a later debate specifically about this.)
True. Neither side can be proved correct but more and more evidence is leading towards the evolution theory as the missing links in the chain of evolution from monkey to human are found.

Another not entirely unsignificant note is that both may coexist. In other words, God created monkeys and guided a group of them to evolve slowly and steadily into what humans are today.
Now, talking about instincts...
People who behave themselves out of fear for God, miss the point of living and learning in the first place.
Very correct, they do. I don't live or believe out fear in fact I'm just living a good life guided by the Bible (well, trying). Jesus+Nothing=Salvation, I don't need to do anything except truly except accept god's Free gift.
I can't refute this argument but neither can I agree with it.
One should naturally behave, regardless of whatever deity is looking over this planet (if any). People saying they are acting one way or another because it's written in the Bible they should, do not act upon their own judgement.
Hmm... Lets say there is an all powerful creator of all. That would make him the highest power of all right? So, if he commands something wouldn't it be wise to obey, just like you obey the law?

What you're saying is everyone, ignore all rules and do whatever you want and ignore all authority. I believe that would be treason to the highest power of all as it means you're making yourself more important than him.
So if God tells you that you should kill someone every day, you would?
Would you obey that order if it was written in the law?

I assume not, no matter how extreme this example is. Or a less extreme example that has been written in some laws, albeit often temporarily; do not talk with people of *insert religion X or nationality here*,

That being said, many things that are common sense, are also written in the Tenach/Bible/Quran or in the laws. But do I need laws to not do these things?
No, I don't. I can behave myself without them.
Not acting upon ones own judgement of what's good and bad, but instead following the leaders can be disastrous, and the Bible fulfilling the role of the leader is no different.
Are you an Anarchist, as this also is their belief? Leaders guide us an keep order and make stuff "good" (well they try at least, that's the quality of a good leader). Also people who blindly follow and believe something are Fundamentalists, which I dislike. If you believe something you should at least think why and that is what I do. Bad leaders lead to disaster.
No, I am not an anarchist.
But good leaders rarely appear in a position of leadership as these do not want to have the position of responsibility, nor does the position of power and money appeal to them. However, it does appeal to bad leaders, and hence there are more bad than good leaders in general.

That, and...
The Bible fulfilled this role in the past, and let's not get started on the Nazi's or the North Korean prison camps.
The Bible doesn't prevent people from doing bad stuff, it says what you shouldn't do, doesn't stop you. Like the law in every country, it doesn't stop you from breaking them. Something else enforces them.
...this. Rules, either by law or by religion, are needed to keep humans in check, and for those that cross the boundaries law enforcement exists. It's kinda sad this is needed, though, but we've touched upon that subject already. Humans never learn.
The sins and atrocities we commit are depending on how we grow up and whether we decide to burn our moral compass to ashes.
Yes, but we all sin however we grow up. People burn their moral compasses by sinning and this is also in the Bible. You basically agreeing with a lot I'm saying.
It's not only in the Bible; it's in the Quran and other ancient writings as well, and not all of those are religious.
However, people do not burn their moral compasses by sinning. They sin because they burned their moral compass prior.

And yes, we agree on the main lines of things, but we both have an entirely different starting point to get there.
As such, I do not believe in a God who is going to judge us upon our sins. If a God exist, he doesn't judge.
Wait, why wouldn't he judge?
Because he can't. He lacks the power to do so if he exists.
There is no hell, there is no heaven, even though the time you spend in between lives will be likely much more pleasant if you do not commit atrocities.

I also do not believe in Jesus that somehow becomes responsible for our own sins of all things and takes them upon him with his sacrifice and will to forgive. He was just a spiritual man with a lot of wisdom that managed to gather a cult around him (partially helped by the time and a lack of general scientific knowledge, while an universal language (Latin) as well as the possibility to write existed). Furthermore, Jesus died young, inspiring his followers and fertilizing the soil for the cult to grow into a large religion.
However, he would turn his grave upside down if he knows what people did in his name later on, especially the Thirty Years' War. Humans did not learn from his death, not at all, and at this point in history it became very clear that humans would never learn. But Jesus is not unique in what he did, except in the sense that he allowed his cult to grow into a religion that blossomed for many centuries to come.
Human's never learn and that is why he died, others didn't claim he would die for our sins. No, he did, he claimed he was God. As humans never learn (The Jewish law) god sent his only son by grace and mercy to forgive as we are all (sorry) sinners who are stubborn and don't learn from all our mistakes.
You misunderstood my point here. I'm saying that Jesus was just at the right place and the right time to allow the life around him to grow into more than a cult - a full-blown religion.
Plenty of people outside of him have claimed they were god/a deity and gained followers, but many of these cults died fast after the death of the founder. But because Jesus was murdered, again at the right place and the right time, people believed him even after his death. Which was crucial in allowing Christianity to bloom - the religion was named after him after all. I also believe that Jesus was not murdered, Christianity would not exist nowadays even if Jesus' life would be the same otherwise.
In a particularly trollish mood, I would've said that Jesus was suffering from schizophrenia.

But I think this is where our main difference lies. I don't believe in a God, and believe Christianity and its rise came out of various circumstances during Jesus' life, death and the existance of the Latin language.
Same for the Islamic religion and their prophet.
Every soul has to follow his own path to wisdom and enlightenment, throughout many lives, living as humans, animals and aliens alike.
Correct, God saves at a personal level and you get to know him through your own seeking and search for wisdom.
But I don't need God for that. Wisdom and deities (whether monotheistical or polytheistical does not matter) are not connected. They are seperate.
My sig is a void.

User avatar
MysteriousLad
Rank: Mysterious President
Location: In your computer.

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by MysteriousLad » Sun Aug 24, 2014 11:52 pm

MysteriousLad wrote:I myself am sometimes tempted to say I'm a satanist or God sucks in a religion topic full of fundamentalist/"hard-core" Christians, it is just about the most entertaining things to do on the internet.

Your giving two arguments here;
1.The Problem of Evil.
2.The devil being a God.
You have probably heard this argument, for the first "problem" before and hence probably refute it but I will quote it from it's maker anyway here it is:

Alvin Platinga:
"A world containing creatures who are significantly free (and freely perform more good than evil actions) is more valuable, all else being equal, than a world containing no free creatures at all. Now God can create free creatures, but He can't cause or determine them to do only what is right. For if He does so, then they aren't significantly free after all; they do not do what is right freely. To create creatures capable of moral good, therefore, He must create creatures capable of moral evil; and He can't give these creatures the freedom to perform evil and at the same time prevent them from doing so. As it turned out, sadly enough, some of the free creatures God created went wrong in the exercise of their freedom; this is the source of moral evil. The fact that free creatures sometimes go wrong, however, counts neither against God's omnipotence nor against His goodness; for He could have forestalled the occurrence of moral evil only by removing the possibility of moral good."

I can I attempt to discuss this but I won't pretend I know what philosopher have been struggling with for centuries.
Responding here would indeed lead to a pointless argument but it will be indirectly touched upon near the end of this post.
No comments.
Now I can say with certainty that if you search the Bible you will see Satan is far from a god. He is an angel (named Lucifer) who was amongst the highest if the angels. He wanted the worship which angels gave to God for himself so he rebelled. He has no power over us no matter how much he tries to deceive us, and that's just what he tries to do (and what he does) deceive and tempt. He is not a God, far from it.
that makes him a deity nonetheless, even if not on the same rank as God himself (hence the lack of a capital). To draw a (not entirely correct) parallel with Greek mythology, God is Zeus and the Devil is Hades. Zeus is ranked above Hades without a doubt, but that doesn't mean Hades isn't a god/deity.
So if I deceive you and tempt you I'm a God? That would make all humans God. I assume you mean he rules over death and hell (I het this idea from the Hades comparison) but he has no control or power nor influence over either. Hell was made by God to punish satan and his angeles (who are angles who decided to help satan attempt to rebel against God before our universe was made, they are referred to as "demons") and is not (unlike media suggests) the domain of the devil where he rules from. If this isn't your reason you will have to correct me and say what you mean.
I can correct that last sentence for you; We may have evolved out of monkeys, after all. (Please, lets not start an evolution debate, they never end as neither side can be proven correct. As you may already know I'm an Old Earth Creationist but if some undeniable evidence pops up that can change. Once again I always apply the quote at the top of my OP to everything I "believe". If you really want to discuss this it's an open forum so you may but I could make a later debate specifically about this.)
True. Neither side can be proved correct but more and more evidence is leading towards the evolution theory as the missing links in the chain of evolution from monkey to human are found.
I disagree but won't explain why. (Evolution debates are the worst.)
Another not entirely unsignificant note is that both may coexist. In other words, God created monkeys and guided a group of them to evolve slowly and steadily into what humans are today.
Yes I know, hence I said if some overwhelming evidence pops up my views on this may change.

Very correct, they do. I don't live or believe out fear in fact I'm just living a good life guided by the Bible (well, trying). Jesus+Nothing=Salvation, I don't need to do anything except truly except accept god's Free gift.
I can't refute this argument but neither can I agree with it.
This is what makes Christianity an unique religion. (Apart from monotheism) you don't work to get a reward (eternal life, better reincarnation etc.) you get it free.
Hmm... Lets say there is an all powerful creator of all. That would make him the highest power of all right? So, if he commands something wouldn't it be wise to obey, just like you obey the law?

What you're saying is everyone, ignore all rules and do whatever you want and ignore all authority. I believe that would be treason to the highest power of all as it means you're making yourself more important than him.
So if God tells you that you should kill someone every day, you would?
Would you obey that order if it was written in the law?
Yes I would for the first one, but it will never happen as a good God wouldn't allow it. As murder is by his views a sin and he is a good being, perfect in fact. These terrorists can be questioned about their faith, wether they are Christians. God is the highest power so I must obey him, however he wouldn't ever tell someone to sin, ever, period.

If it was in the law, then no. The law is made by man and if man is encouraging sin (or bad deeds for non christians) then I won't listen as an even higher power has told me not to do so. If two powers contradict each other you listen to the highest or what you think is right. I know murder is wrong and so does God so I won't murder.
I assume not, no matter how extreme this example is. Or a less extreme example that has been written in some laws, albeit often temporarily; do not talk with people of *insert religion X or nationality here*,
Yes, these laws are man made and they are flawed as man is flawed and isn't perfect. God is.
That being said, many things that are common sense, are also written in the Tenach/Bible/Quran or in the laws. But do I need laws to not do these things?
No, I don't. I can behave myself without them.
Indeed, Adam ate from the tree of knowledge so we know what's right or wrong. So if you listen to your (as you call it) "moral compass" you can live a good life. However you can never live perfectly and no one ever has, hence Jesus.
Are you an Anarchist, as this also is their belief? Leaders guide us an keep order and make stuff "good" (well they try at least, that's the quality of a good leader). Also people who blindly follow and believe something are Fundamentalists, which I dislike. If you believe something you should at least think why and that is what I do. Bad leaders lead to disaster.
No, I am not an anarchist.
But good leaders rarely appear in a position of leadership as these do not want to have the position of responsibility, nor does the position of power and money appeal to them. However, it does appeal to bad leaders, and hence there are more bad than good leaders in general.
Ok, that is good to know. :)
Agreed, once again it's man being flawed. God isn't flawed but man is, there will always be imperfection from man.
That, and...
The Bible doesn't prevent people from doing bad stuff, it says what you shouldn't do, doesn't stop you. Like the law in every country, it doesn't stop you from breaking them. Something else enforces them.
...this. Rules, either by law or by religion, are needed to keep humans in check, and for those that cross the boundaries law enforcement exists. It's kinda sad this is needed, though, but we've touched upon that subject already. Humans never learn.
Yes and no, God made the law to show what he considered to be sin. You cannot fail something that isn't there. But it also showed man that they are flawed so in that sense yes you are correct.
God in the end will also enforce his laws, on the day of judgement. Man never learns, agreed.
Yes, but we all sin however we grow up. People burn their moral compasses by sinning and this is also in the Bible. You basically agreeing with a lot I'm saying.
It's not only in the Bible; it's in the Quran and other ancient writings as well, and not all of those are religious.
However, people do not burn their moral compasses by sinning. They sin because they burned their moral compass prior.
I disagree here, a man that murders a lot eventually no longer feels bad about murdering. He get's a "stone-heart" which hardens by doing the bad-deeds. This applies to all, liars don't feel bad about lying eventually as they harden/burn their moral compass. Man has got an element of sin in them however, in the Bible this is explained by the fall in Genesis. If we don't know of sin and haven't ever done it, how can we ever do it in the first place?
And yes, we agree on the main lines of things, but we both have an entirely different starting point to get there.
This is find interesting but also amusing that we have such different views bases of the same evidence/factors.
Wait, why wouldn't he judge?
Because he can't. He lacks the power to do so if he exists.
You must explain this, I don't understand your logic.
Human's never learn and that is why he died, others didn't claim he would die for our sins. No, he did, he claimed he was God. As humans never learn (The Jewish law) god sent his only son by grace and mercy to forgive as we are all (sorry) sinners who are stubborn and don't learn from all our mistakes.
You misunderstood my point here. I'm saying that Jesus was just at the right place and the right time to allow the life around him to grow into more than a cult - a full-blown religion.
Plenty of people outside of him have claimed they were god/a deity and gained followers, but many of these cults died fast after the death of the founder. But because Jesus was murdered, again at the right place and the right time, people believed him even after his death. Which was crucial in allowing Christianity to bloom - the religion was named after him after all. I also believe that Jesus was not murdered, Christianity would not exist nowadays even if Jesus' life would be the same otherwise.
In a particularly trollish mood, I would've said that Jesus was suffering from schizophrenia.
What about the miracles and prophesies he fulfilled? The fact Romans put him on the cross is as good as a historical fact, and that there was an empty grave is another. How the grave was empty is the question, not that it was empty.
But I think this is where our main difference lies. I don't believe in a God, and believe Christianity and its rise came out of various circumstances during Jesus' life, death and the existance of the Latin language.
Same for the Islamic religion and their prophet.
He spoke armanic or something like that. (Don't know the spelling).
{ Correct, God saves at a personal level and you get to know him through your own seeking and search for wisdom.
But I don't need God for that. Wisdom and deities (whether monotheistical or polytheistical does not matter) are not connected. They are seperate.
Have you sinned, yes. Are you perfect? No?
Could a perfect good God let you off his rules for this? No, as he is a good God and that would be a bad deed.
Deeds will never save a man, however to live a good life can be done without God. Or not, without a God there wouldn't be good or bad, so we can do whatever we want as good and bad wouldn't exist in a naturalistic universe.

I'm sorry if my English sucks, I'm Dutch.
"i put on my robe and wizard hat" ~Pkdragon
"rocks fall everyone dies" ~HPD
Welcome to the optimistic world of WWN :D

And logic doesn't work on MysteriousLad... ~Kireato
Wait, wait, wait.

Organized crime is selling bagels on television? Since when? ~Dragon Fogel

ThunderWalker
Rank: Elf
Location: Netherlands

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by ThunderWalker » Mon Aug 25, 2014 4:55 am

MysteriousLad wrote: So if I deceive you and tempt you I'm a God? That would make all humans God. I assume you mean he rules over death and hell (I het this idea from the Hades comparison) but he has no control or power nor influence over either. Hell was made by God to punish satan and his angeles (who are angles who decided to help satan attempt to rebel against God before our universe was made, they are referred to as "demons") and is not (unlike media suggests) the domain of the devil where he rules from. If this isn't your reason you will have to correct me and say what you mean.
Deities are beings that have godlike powers and are above humans.
The God, is already written with a capital, and solely refers to the Christian God. God in this context is a deity - but a deity is not always God.
Then there is "god" without Capital, usually used to refer to any ancient Greek/Roman/Egyptian/etc god. Some atheists use it like this for the Christian God as well, but...

On a side note here - Allah is Arabic for God and as such not solely related to the Islamic culture.
True. Neither side can be proved correct but more and more evidence is leading towards the evolution theory as the missing links in the chain of evolution from monkey to human are found.
I disagree but won't explain why. (Evolution debates are the worst.)
Agreed.
Another not entirely unsignificant note is that both may coexist. In other words, God created monkeys and guided a group of them to evolve slowly and steadily into what humans are today.
Yes I know, hence I said if some overwhelming evidence pops up my views on this may change.
For completion regarding the above subject.
This is what makes Christianity an unique religion. (Apart from monotheism) you don't work to get a reward (eternal life, better reincarnation etc.) you get it free.
True.

Note however that you don't work for better reincarnation. If you do, you missed the point (and you won't reincarnate any better either because you did it out of fear for a bad reincarnation).
So if God tells you that you should kill someone every day, you would?
Would you obey that order if it was written in the law?
Yes I would for the first one, but it will never happen as a good God wouldn't allow it. As murder is by his views a sin and he is a good being, perfect in fact. These terrorists can be questioned about their faith, wether they are Christians. God is the highest power so I must obey him, however he wouldn't ever tell someone to sin, ever, period.
But people said God did tell them to murder. People believed it was right what they were doing. Obviously, a real God would not tell people to sin, but following a blind order from "God" is dangerous at least. Schizophrenic outbursts from religious people are more dangerous than those from atheists with a reason.
If it was in the law, then no. The law is made by man and if man is encouraging sin (or bad deeds for non christians) then I won't listen as an even higher power has told me not to do so. If two powers contradict each other you listen to the highest or what you think is right. I know murder is wrong and so does God so I won't murder.
But would you not murder if you take God out of the equation?
Yes, these laws are man made and they are flawed as man is flawed and isn't perfect. God is.
If God was perfect, humans would be wiser.
Indeed, Adam ate from the tree of knowledge so we know what's right or wrong. So if you listen to your (as you call it) "moral compass" you can live a good life. However you can never live perfectly and no one ever has, hence Jesus.
The tree of knowledge is a metaphor, and an ancient one at that. It is older than the Bible itself.
The tree of knowledge is a figure of speech and referring to the gift Neanderthals started with; the ability to remember and to understand metaphors and symbols. They passed this ability to the Homo Sapiens, but they could not really progress until they understood how to farm either, which allowed their society to progress.

Ok, that is good to know. :)
Agreed, once again it's man being flawed. God isn't flawed but man is, there will always be imperfection from man.
Repeated argument. See above.
Yes and no, God made the law to show what he considered to be sin. You cannot fail something that isn't there. But it also showed man that they are flawed so in that sense yes you are correct.
God in the end will also enforce his laws, on the day of judgement. Man never learns, agreed.
The day of judgement will never come, unless you consider your death as the day of judgement, rendering your argument moot.
I disagree here, a man that murders a lot eventually no longer feels bad about murdering. He get's a "stone-heart" which hardens by doing the bad-deeds. This applies to all, liars don't feel bad about lying eventually as they harden/burn their moral compass. Man has got an element of sin in them however, in the Bible this is explained by the fall in Genesis. If we don't know of sin and haven't ever done it, how can we ever do it in the first place?
Truth. But in order to commit your first murder, you must already have a heart of stone to begin with.

This is find interesting but also amusing that we have such different views bases of the same evidence/factors.
Indeed.
Because he can't. He lacks the power to do so if he exists.
You must explain this, I don't understand your logic.
God simply lacks the power to do so. He does not have even the slightest control on humanity, considering how many religions are running rampant (and the overwhelming majority of these religions proclaim they have the truth).

Yes, you may say God gave us freedom of choice, but we would still be free of choice if we had more wisdom in general.

Furthermore, even if God has the power to judge properly, he would not. He forgives everybody's sins, and it is much harder to forgive if one makes a judgement.
What about the miracles and prophesies Jesus fulfilled? The fact Romans put him on the cross is as good as a historical fact, and that there was an empty grave is another. How the grave was empty is the question, not that it was empty.
Well... in ancient times miracles were often grossly exaggerated so I have a tendency to take them with a grain of salt.
But I think this is where our main difference lies. I don't believe in a God, and believe Christianity and its rise came out of various circumstances during Jesus' life, death and the existance of the Latin language.
Same for the Islamic religion and their prophet.
He spoke armanic or something like that. (Don't know the spelling).
But the tales of Jesus were spread easily thanks to Latin.
But I don't need God for that. Wisdom and deities (whether monotheistical or polytheistical does not matter) are not connected. They are seperate.
Have you sinned, yes. Are you perfect? No?
Could a perfect good God let you off his rules for this? No, as he is a good God and that would be a bad deed.
Deeds will never save a man, however to live a good life can be done without God. Or not, without a God there wouldn't be good or bad, so we can do whatever we want as good and bad wouldn't exist in a naturalistic universe.
Without a God there still is good and bad. It is all the same with or without one. Bad = hurting someone
Good = helping someone.
Neutral = hiding under a rock
I'm sorry if my English sucks, I'm Dutch.
So am I.
My sig is a void.

User avatar
Dragonite
Rank: My face is beaming.
Location: the netherlands(mostly)

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by Dragonite » Mon Aug 25, 2014 5:06 am

MysteriousLad wrote:
Dragonite wrote:That's what I meant with human psychology/human orgins being a argument against Christianity earlier ML. You believe in a fall of sorts,and christian theology heavily leans of us don't deserving much based on our actions vs. what got intended for us.
Yes, I believe in a fall along with all Jews and Christians. We don't deserve much as we sin, breaking the rules of the highest power in everything (I refrain from saying universe as he is not part of our universe.). He made us for a perfect relation with him but we turn from him and sin. Therefor we deserve death, God hates the fact the we sin and has great sorrow because of it. So he made the mosaic-law to show us what sin is and to get our sins forgiven with sacrifices and laws; This is what the Jews live by. But, he promised a time would come were all our sins are forgiven; Jesus. Jesus lived perfectly and therefor was a "perfect sacrifice" and he died for our sins forgiving all of them if you choose to accept him as your saviour and accept the sacrifice. God did this as he loves everyone and wants everyone to live with him, yeah we don't deserve it, but he is so graceful to forgive us anyway.
Dragonite wrote:But if remember correctly you don't take the literal young earth angle. With modern knowledge, there's isn't any point that can be called a ''fall''. And by now means I deny humanity has shortcomings.
Yeah, I believe that Genesis now translated "days" (In Hebrew language the word now translated as day can also be translated as period of time.) stands for periods of time and not literal 7 days. The fall is the first time man sinned, wether Adam and Eve are to be taken literally or as a parable I don't know but I edge to the first option.
So you now believe humanity ha no shortcomings? That means you believe we are perfect and that would mean stuff like rape and murder can't be called "wrong". I'll come to this point later.
[/quote="Dragonite"]However, the ancient world of the bible was ''fallen'', but also our far hunter-gatherer ancestors, and before that... our primate ancestor, of which one branch became modern humanity. Basically all the typical ''fallen'' attributes of humanity and current animal kingdom are far older then humanity itself.
This always an interesting topic, wether or not animal death was "fallen" is up for debate. Death came to humanity from the spiritual fall but animals have no "soul" so animals dying may have been seen as perfect in God's eyes. This is a great topic to research quickly and I won't go into it here. As for the "ancestor" I beg us not to have an Evolution debate as they suck as no one can win. I am an OEC (Old Earth Creationist) who believes Micro-Evolution, as that can be observed, macro-evolution can't be. But anyway, these ancestors then came after the fall.
Another interesting view from Theistic Evolutionists is that god let life evolve and then chose our race to be his chosen people an he "breathed" his spirit into us. So this topic also makes for an interesting read.
What other "fallen" attributes do you mean except for animal death.
Dragonite wrote: Survival wasn't a cakewalk, and humans today aren't really fine-tuned for peaceful coexistence(still possible, just several aspects of the human mind make it a lot harder).With this, humanity being ''fallen'' in any means, and all claims following it, about sickness being caused by it, and us being judged for the resurrection, fall flat as well. I probably haven't convinced you of anything, but you probably see what the domino effect is I'm describing here.
Human nature is to sin and wage wars yes as we are in a fallen world living as a fallen race. Yet all people (well most) think that there is something wrong with the world. Ask some random people on the street what is wrong with the world and they will give 3 possible answers:
1.Some sort of suffering
2.In the news recently (Politics, Wars, Economy)
3.Not thinking well and saying something like "broken legs" or "my neighbour".
If they answer 2 or 3 you can ask; "So if ... wasn't in the world the world we be perfect?"
Then they usually get the point and they say something like "sickness" or "pain". It's funny how we think the world isn't perfect even though we have known nothing better. Also a naturalistic universe would have no morals, there would be no "right" or "wrong". Yet we have such a strong opinion on precisely those 2 words. If someone rapes someone we say it's "wrong" but in a naturalistic universe, who are we to tell them that if there is no such thing as "wrong".
Most people strive for fulfilment, trying to feel fulfilled and try to get better and more. Yet it doesn't stop, we are always looking for something better; more money, fame, drugs you name it. It just looks like humans have something wired into them making them want to be fulfilled, something the Bible can explain. We were made for a perfect relationship with God but we have fallen so we try to replace god with whatever we can, without success as only God is perfect.
As for illness blame the Devil for that, he has tainted the world and effectively rules it.

Judgement will work like this; all are raised from the dead and judged for everything they have ever thought and done. We are all guilty of sin so we need God's forgiveness through Jesus or through the law (Only applies to Jews as said in the Bible). If you have any sin you fail the judgement and what happens next is another great debate to read on. But if you had accepted Christ then your sins were forgiven and you will live on the new Earth. There will likely also be rewards depending on how much "righteousness (good)" you did on Earth but in the end all will be free of anything "unperfect" so no sorrow, pain etc.[/quote]

Alright, time to reply to this. I've approached this mostly from building upon your posts, and your theistic worldview. What I'm repeating so it's clear that is my own (naturalistic views) are a completely different track of thoughts and concepts. Words that are the same simply don't mean the same. Going to approach this on my own terms here. Bluntness warning, going into honesty mode here, but it's debate, don't take anything personal.

First off, imperfection. I think human life is ''imperfect'' too. However, your approach this concept in humans being perfect once, and the entire concept of humanity's corruption, and whats perfect and imperfect in the first place, in relation to the Theistic God. You also speak of what people would want to ''fix'' it.

However, I think this imperfection has always been there, and always will be. In fact, I think humans being perfect is logically impossible. Approaching humans ''corrupted now, they where good before'', is a extremely simplistic approach. Within psychology, there's a good understanding why we behave in a certain way, and also what the reason for our flaws and fallacies is. And by the latter I don't mean evil. Everything in psychology is two sides on the same coin, and also related to being a biological with a brain, and affected by hormones. Being imperfect is what it means to be a human. Just throwing all negative traits in the ''evil/corruption'' bin i, and us being a good being with only positive traits, is impossible. Being a human is accepting the whole package. Try reading up on psychology more, you'll know what I mean. To put it's simply, human psychology is more complex then just sorting stuff in being good or evil.(which is why you can't just magically fix it)

This brings me to your ''what's good or evil in a naturalistic world''. To be a little harsh, the way you(and theists) approach is rather black and white, and somewhat simplistic. Yes, as a atheist, I can just decide good for me is to live the good life, and just casually murder everybody in my way for funsies. But why in the world would I want to? There's no logic in that, and if I would consider it, certain things trigger that made me cringe at such a thought. In my brain my behavior is hardwired by evolution to not want that, and my upbringing/society forbids that as well.
In some people, the part that stops you from caring about others is downright broken, or perhaps worse, brain damage removes it. That's called a sociopath, and sadly, that happens naturally too. And it various between people(our personality), one man has a easier time being moral then the other. Where's the justice in that? Having a screwed up upbringing also can ruin it.

I know you reaction to the hardwired part, God made us so, because he defines Good and Evil. Well, as I said, I'm taking my own take on things here, and I think naturalistic evolution can produce such hardwiring because it's beneficial to us(*1), in addition to human society(those things also influence each other in a feedback loop).Absolute good and evil indeed do not exist. But as I said, for the reason I just outlined I just don't do egoistical things all the time. I know your objection of how you would even define ''good'' in the first place then. Well, look around you. Philosophers from many (opposing!) disciplines have been developing and debating ethical systems for ages. We have political left and right wing parties, with entire different outlooks, and both sides don't agree what's truly the ''good'' to run a country/world. Precisely because we're imperfect, and as humans always will be is good and evil such a immensely difficult and complex question. Humanity will probably be pondering and balancing it for the rest of it's existence. In my opinion,Absolute Good and Evil is a incredibly simplistic concept. Accepting we will never be perfect, but try to do our best to reduce the impact of whatever flaws we have, and knowing many moral questions will never have a easy solution, seems to be the best way forward. It isn't easy, but it's realistic. And for that reason, I think a naturalistic worldview is the best one to have.(such a cliched line..., doesn't everyone say this of their own worldview? :P) Switching back to your ''track'' again, well, all the talk about being fallen, and a perfect being who as all answers.., let's leave it at ''strongly disagree'', there's no need to go any further then that for the moment.

*1: yeah, making evolution claims here. Evolution debate is messy enough to warrant a dozen topics of it's own, but especially when dealing with naturalism, debate is going to depend on what the deal with evolution vs other approaches is, which means arguing about them specifically. In my view evolution as a broad concept is a certainty, in (mainstream) science only the specifics are still being debated. Going into evolution talk mode may indeed be advisable, but at least I'm clear about it like this. >_>

Hope I wasn't overly blunt, it's harder to make points holding back on it.

User avatar
MysteriousLad
Rank: Mysterious President
Location: In your computer.

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by MysteriousLad » Mon Aug 25, 2014 5:37 am

If we must go into evolution I think it would be beter if make a seperate topic for that exact matter. Also what are your views on Jesus and modern miracles? If have seen and had a few done infront of my eyes and by me. This confirms what I already believe, in my view of everything as you stated. I may make an attempt to react to your post but the hard facts are I'm just a teenage boy trying to get good enougth grades to study biology at cambridge. and I'm not going to try and do something I can't do. I'm not a philosopher or psychologist so my defence would likely be feeble, and I'm fine with that I'm young and have alot to learn. Your post wasn't too blunt if your wondering about that aswell.
One thing (trying to avoid evolution here), how do you believe the universe started? And how the first life on earth formed? (So first life form like a first cell etc.)
Say if you want me to make a evolution debate topic.
Also, psychology can tell us why we do stuff but not how it came to be that we do those stuff. Human psychology can change over time and be influenced by say, a bad childhood. Yet, there is always a starting point which we are born with, and that has a moral compass built in. How did that get there? (Crumpets, seems I just forced us into evolution)
Another point what I find an interesting one, te laws of nature themselfs; we can explain what they do but we can't explaim why they're there and why they do what they do. It seems there is some "lawkeeper", mind my simplicity, this is all coming out the mind of a 15 year old.
"i put on my robe and wizard hat" ~Pkdragon
"rocks fall everyone dies" ~HPD
Welcome to the optimistic world of WWN :D

And logic doesn't work on MysteriousLad... ~Kireato
Wait, wait, wait.

Organized crime is selling bagels on television? Since when? ~Dragon Fogel

User avatar
MysteriousLad
Rank: Mysterious President
Location: In your computer.

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by MysteriousLad » Mon Aug 25, 2014 6:15 am

I have no reply to morality evolving so I did some research and these two peeks my interest. One being Atheistic the other seems to be Theistic.
Theist: http://ethicalrealism.wordpress.com/201 ... -morality/
Atheist: https://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/TEth/TEthByro.htm
"i put on my robe and wizard hat" ~Pkdragon
"rocks fall everyone dies" ~HPD
Welcome to the optimistic world of WWN :D

And logic doesn't work on MysteriousLad... ~Kireato
Wait, wait, wait.

Organized crime is selling bagels on television? Since when? ~Dragon Fogel

User avatar
Dragonite
Rank: My face is beaming.
Location: the netherlands(mostly)

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by Dragonite » Mon Aug 25, 2014 7:29 am

I don't ask that of you, don't worry. I told you about my history, There have been times where I was thinking about this every single day, and you're younger then I was when I was more or less forced fo pay more attention to it. At your age I'm not going to press you to back everything up perfectly, although writing complex replies may stimulate you.

Miracles, well, I repeat, touchy subject, will not be going easy on you with that I fear. I was active in a large debate forum about well, all of the subjects this topic covers, when the healing stuff was bothering me. Made a topic about it, which after thinking it over for a month or two made me adopt a more skeptical stance on it. Link: http://www.evcforum.net/dm.php?control= ... mpp=15&p=1

This new mobile theme lacks URL buttons. Anyway, take a peek, if also shows past me well.

User avatar
MysteriousLad
Rank: Mysterious President
Location: In your computer.

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by MysteriousLad » Mon Aug 25, 2014 5:07 pm

Dragonite wrote:I don't ask that of you, don't worry. I told you about my history, There have been times where I was thinking about this every single day, and you're younger then I was when I was more or less forced fo pay more attention to it. At your age I'm not going to press you to back everything up perfectly, although writing complex replies may stimulate you.

Miracles, well, I repeat, touchy subject, will not be going easy on you with that I fear. I was active in a large debate forum about well, all of the subjects this topic covers, when the healing stuff was bothering me. Made a topic about it, which after thinking it over for a month or two made me adopt a more skeptical stance on it. Link: http://www.evcforum.net/dm.php?control= ... mpp=15&p=1

This new mobile theme lacks URL buttons. Anyway, take a peek, if also shows past me well.
Ah, the problem there is if there was a miracle, they would just deny it saying we don't know how it happend (yet). However this would still not clarify how they happen at those specific times right after prayer. I have seen peole with glasses throw them away and live on without them after opticians checked it out. You could shrug it all off as coincidences but as someone somewhere stated "God is the God of coincedences".

Let me ask you, why don't you believe in miracles? Ignore the stupid falseifiers and liars the real ones where science has no answer?

Here's a link to a video from the "bible-week" I went on, it shows Adrian Holloway speaking on the subject why not everyone is healed and it is from a month ago or so:
http://newdaygeneration.org/resources/r ... al_everyon
"i put on my robe and wizard hat" ~Pkdragon
"rocks fall everyone dies" ~HPD
Welcome to the optimistic world of WWN :D

And logic doesn't work on MysteriousLad... ~Kireato
Wait, wait, wait.

Organized crime is selling bagels on television? Since when? ~Dragon Fogel

User avatar
Dragonite
Rank: My face is beaming.
Location: the netherlands(mostly)

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by Dragonite » Mon Aug 25, 2014 10:01 pm

Somewhat in a rush, but to keep it simple:

A- you phrased it as ''real miracles'', but that not something I will just concede. It's normally impossible, or perhaps explainable by something natural that we don't really know yet(the body has unexpected healing abilities at times.) To bring up another cliched line, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. How things normally happen is a hard norm. If this is somehow broken you'll need a incredibly strong case. People have been investigating dozens of miracles, but they failed to record anything supernatural beyond a shadow of doubt. I can't just take your word for it either. You're not a qualified medic, you're still (sorry) quite young, and there's still placebo/unknown body functions that are still possible. The lesson I learnt before, general, but especially on this subject, is that if I can't explain something naturally on a certain subject, that doesn't mean nobody else can.


B- Aside from my specific issues with healing itself, everything else points to God not existing for me. What your worldview is depends on multiple ''pillars'' so to speak. In 2011 I more or less suffered a minor mental breakdown from the implications if God existed after all after everything else I've learned about the world(biology, bible, etc, I said that one before). The same would happen again if I where to take the same approach on healing again. Another factor is that my deconversion happened because of intrusive thought, obsessive compulsive disease, which was a incredible hard thing to endure, and eventually rise above. Combined with the other cognitive dissonance... well, it would throw me right back in my mental horrors.

User avatar
MysteriousLad
Rank: Mysterious President
Location: In your computer.

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by MysteriousLad » Mon Aug 25, 2014 10:36 pm

Another couple of good reads:
http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/probe/docs/sociobio.html
And this one from an atheist who picks the 3rd option:
http://atheistethicist.blogspot.nl/2013 ... y.html?m=1

Looking up different evidence and research is leading my to see more problems in evolution causing our sence of morality, which leaves 2 views left:
1. Man has a built in "moral compass" that was put there. (Theistic explanation)
2. Morality is caused by culture. (Non-Evolutionistic Atheist explanation)
"i put on my robe and wizard hat" ~Pkdragon
"rocks fall everyone dies" ~HPD
Welcome to the optimistic world of WWN :D

And logic doesn't work on MysteriousLad... ~Kireato
Wait, wait, wait.

Organized crime is selling bagels on television? Since when? ~Dragon Fogel

User avatar
MysteriousLad
Rank: Mysterious President
Location: In your computer.

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by MysteriousLad » Mon Aug 25, 2014 11:05 pm

Dragonite wrote:Somewhat in a rush, but to keep it simple:

A- you phrased it as ''real miracles'', but that not something I will just concede. It's normally impossible, or perhaps explainable by something natural that we don't really know yet(the body has unexpected healing abilities at times.) To bring up another cliched line, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. How things normally happen is a hard norm. If this is somehow broken you'll need a incredibly strong case. People have been investigating dozens of miracles, but they failed to record anything supernatural beyond a shadow of doubt. I can't just take your word for it either. You're not a qualified medic, you're still (sorry) quite young, and there's still placebo/unknown body functions that are still possible. The lesson I learnt before, general, but especially on this subject, is that if I can't explain something naturally on a certain subject, that doesn't mean nobody else can.
Yes but if no one has an explanation why reject the possibilty of a miracle? I find so many atheists arguing in circles, or rejecting the best fitting theory at that time. Does a judge at court say to someone who cannot be proven guilty and they cannot find evidence at all for his guilt say "You are declared guilty because evidence may pop up later and I don't like the alternative.". No, that wouldn't happen, people deny the possibility of a God because "They don't like what that would mean.".
As for the circular argument:
Sadly some people think like this; God doesn't exist, therfore miracles definitely don't happen, so we don't have to consider the evidence for miracles. Now, if I were to give evidence for a miracle it gets shrugged of with "It's fake" so I ask how and get this;
"Because miracles don't happen."
I'm not saying we should believe every claim, but I'm saying you should look at the evidence of a claim. There are many miracles that even specialist medical proffesionals cannot explain, so we are left with this as evidence:
1. The healing happened after a prayer
2. It cannot be explained by current medical science
Now you can get two explanations;
1. Miracle
2. Coincedence which we can't explain and I don't lie the idea of "miracle".
The funny thing is it would be the biggest coincidence to man if all these healings happened often. Which they do, if you look at the evidence.

B- Aside from my specific issues with healing itself, everything else points to God not existing for me.
I heard your idea of human psychology, what other "points" are missing?
What your worldview is depends on multiple ''pillars'' so to speak.
I'm confused as to what you mean here.
In 2011 I more or less suffered a minor mental breakdown from the implications if God existed after all after everything else I've learned about the world(biology, bible, etc, I said that one before).
What where the implications you thought about? I'm know it probaly sucks to be reminded of this and you don't need to react to this if you don't want to.
The same would happen again if I where to take the same approach on healing again. Another factor is that my deconversion happened because of intrusive thought, obsessive compulsive disease, which was a incredible hard thing to endure, and eventually rise above. Combined with the other cognitive dissonance... well, it would throw me right back in my mental horrors.
[/quote]
That sucks, but this is one of the reasons I believe in a God who saves. Life sucks, more for some than others but there is always then the hope for me knowing that will all come to an end. (Trying not to sound cheesy here)
"i put on my robe and wizard hat" ~Pkdragon
"rocks fall everyone dies" ~HPD
Welcome to the optimistic world of WWN :D

And logic doesn't work on MysteriousLad... ~Kireato
Wait, wait, wait.

Organized crime is selling bagels on television? Since when? ~Dragon Fogel

ThunderWalker
Rank: Elf
Location: Netherlands

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by ThunderWalker » Tue Aug 26, 2014 6:10 am

MysteriousLad wrote: As for the circular argument:
Sadly some people think like this; God doesn't exist, therfore miracles definitely don't happen, so we don't have to consider the evidence for miracles. Now, if I were to give evidence for a miracle it gets shrugged of with "It's fake" so I ask how and get this;
"Because miracles don't happen."
I'm not saying we should believe every claim, but I'm saying you should look at the evidence of a claim. There are many miracles that even specialist medical proffesionals cannot explain, so we are left with this as evidence:
Miracles do happen and they will keep happening, and more than just a few of those are unrelated to prayers or whatever.

However, in ancient times these things were often grossly exaggerated with some bizarre consequences, mostly out of fear (witch hunts come to mind, and this was not even that long ago).
My sig is a void.

User avatar
MysteriousLad
Rank: Mysterious President
Location: In your computer.

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by MysteriousLad » Tue Aug 26, 2014 2:45 pm

ThunderWalker wrote:
MysteriousLad wrote: As for the circular argument:
Sadly some people think like this; God doesn't exist, therfore miracles definitely don't happen, so we don't have to consider the evidence for miracles. Now, if I were to give evidence for a miracle it gets shrugged of with "It's fake" so I ask how and get this;
"Because miracles don't happen."
I'm not saying we should believe every claim, but I'm saying you should look at the evidence of a claim. There are many miracles that even specialist medical proffesionals cannot explain, so we are left with this as evidence:
Miracles do happen and they will keep happening, and more than just a few of those are unrelated to prayers or whatever.

However, in ancient times these things were often grossly exaggerated with some bizarre consequences, mostly out of fear (witch hunts come to mind, and this was not even that long ago).
The problem here is that the Pharisee's were trying to diminish Jesus's influence, and even continued you to do so after death. If the Pharisees had spotted one thing in texts like Mark and such they would of gone over the top and use it to try and prove their point. Yet, they didn't and they were the scholars of those days. If they saw Jesus say "stand up and walk" and a man they know is paralyzed then does it, they wpuld of done exstensive research into wether it was faked as they were trying to acuse Jesus of just that. This is also seen in texts outside of the Bible.
"i put on my robe and wizard hat" ~Pkdragon
"rocks fall everyone dies" ~HPD
Welcome to the optimistic world of WWN :D

And logic doesn't work on MysteriousLad... ~Kireato
Wait, wait, wait.

Organized crime is selling bagels on television? Since when? ~Dragon Fogel

User avatar
monkymeet
Rank: Bitch
3DS Code: 3480-3067-3928
Contact:

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by monkymeet » Wed Aug 27, 2014 2:41 am

ML, I think relying on mostly one source (and of dubious accuracy) is really something that shouldn't be done in a debate. Debates require numerous sources, as putting your arguments in one basket is an easy way to null them.

Why must it be a Christian God? What about the idea of the deist God? I think you need to start learning about other religions and read historical texts that challenge the biblical narrative before you can really come back to philosophise about Christianity itself. Citing the same book and written works that have been hand-picked is not the way to go about challenging your beliefs. I read plenty of Christian texts in high school despite being agnostic, and my conclusions were the result of reflecting on all of the works combined.

I'm not trying to dissuade you from being Christian. It's totally fine to be a Christian (as long as you aren't a bigot about it). But if you really want to learn, you will have to read the links that Terragent posted (and many other writings) with a careful and open-mind so you can approach them from a rational perspective. Don't just push them away because they challenge your beliefs in a way you don't like. Your final conclusion (and it can and likely will change during your life) will be that much more worthwhile and strong, no matter what it is.
imageshack swallowed up my sig. This is a placeholder.

User avatar
MysteriousLad
Rank: Mysterious President
Location: In your computer.

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by MysteriousLad » Wed Aug 27, 2014 3:14 am

monkymeet wrote:ML, I think relying on mostly one source (and of dubious accuracy) is really something that shouldn't be done in a debate. Debates require numerous sources, as putting your arguments in one basket is an easy way to null them.

Why must it be a Christian God? What about the idea of the deist God? I think you need to start learning about other religions and read historical texts that challenge the biblical narrative before you can really come back to philosophise about Christianity itself. Citing the same book and written works that have been hand-picked is not the way to go about challenging your beliefs. I read plenty of Christian texts in high school despite being agnostic, and my conclusions were the result of reflecting on all of the works combined.

I'm not trying to dissuade you from being Christian. It's totally fine to be a Christian (as long as you aren't a bigot about it). But if you really want to learn, you will have to read the links that Terragent posted (and many other writings) with a careful and open-mind so you can approach them from a rational perspective. Don't just push them away because they challenge your beliefs in a way you don't like. Your final conclusion (and it can and likely will change during your life) will be that much more worthwhile and strong, no matter what it is.
I read them and as I stated, I'm not a scholar and I'm young so any reply I give would be terrible. I'm fine with not being able to know something as I'm only 15. I didn't push them away and infact I'm still looking at more sources on the subject. Sadly there were no books at my local library so I have to resort to internet. However alot on the internet is biased/false and I therefore need to be careful as to what I believe/quote. What terragant posted is still being thpught through be me, bit it's unlikely I will be able to provide evidence against something which is done by scholars. Saying I can would be arrogance on my part so that's why I let the matter lie, although it definetley hasn't been merely ignored as I have no explanation.

Edit: I will attempt a reply going through all three links of terr later. I will do in a similar fashion as I did with a blog Draggy gave me last discussiom which I worked through and explained why I thought statements were invalid/wrong sometimes this was paired with alot of research.
"i put on my robe and wizard hat" ~Pkdragon
"rocks fall everyone dies" ~HPD
Welcome to the optimistic world of WWN :D

And logic doesn't work on MysteriousLad... ~Kireato
Wait, wait, wait.

Organized crime is selling bagels on television? Since when? ~Dragon Fogel

User avatar
Sven

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by Sven » Wed Aug 27, 2014 3:49 am

not being a scholar or being young are terrible excuses to avoid upping your level of engagement with a topic you're clearly passionate about, no offense dude. there's no magic age where you become 'scholarly' or where you're suddenly able to handle topics you couldn't effectively engage with before. take it from someone who believed the same thing at 16.

people are asking you to cite sources and stuff not because we're trying to destroy your views, but because we want to engage with you on an equal level and can't do so if you're just going to give up before things get started. if you find digging up historical resources too taxing (and it is a huge bitch!), terr genuinely does do most of the start with his posts. the rest is up to you.

i should not be drunk at 2 PM.

User avatar
MysteriousLad
Rank: Mysterious President
Location: In your computer.

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by MysteriousLad » Wed Aug 27, 2014 3:54 am

Sven wrote:not being a scholar or being young are terrible excuses to avoid upping your level of engagement with a topic you're clearly passionate about, no offense dude. there's no magic age where you become 'scholarly' or where you're suddenly able to handle topics you couldn't effectively engage with before. take it from someone who believed the same thing at 16.

people are asking you to cite sources and stuff not because we're trying to destroy your views, but because we want to engage with you on an equal level and can't do so if you're just going to give up before things get started. if you find digging up historical resources too taxing (and it is a huge bitch!), terr genuinely does do most of the start with his posts. the rest is up to you.

i should not be drunk at 2 PM.
Hmm, but being a Scholar does help a lot. It means you know what your looking for.
As said before, I'm trying my best to look for stuff but the internet isn't helping. As for the rest of my knowledge, countless books and internet.
I am here trying to validate the gospels, a skill I and many 15 year olds don't have :).
"i put on my robe and wizard hat" ~Pkdragon
"rocks fall everyone dies" ~HPD
Welcome to the optimistic world of WWN :D

And logic doesn't work on MysteriousLad... ~Kireato
Wait, wait, wait.

Organized crime is selling bagels on television? Since when? ~Dragon Fogel

User avatar
MysteriousLad
Rank: Mysterious President
Location: In your computer.

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by MysteriousLad » Wed Aug 27, 2014 4:27 am

Ok, here goes. I'm going to go through your argument bit by bit and then the problems in the wikipedia article which scholars face with the Bible. However I will probably make no sense as who am I to say I can do the job of a Scholar?
Terragent wrote:The historical existence of Jesus is a moot point - what is not moot is that there aren't any non-Christian sources attesting to any of the multitude of miracles he's supposed to have performed; you know, the sort of things that would probably have caused a stir if they'd ever actually happened.
And regardless of that, the gospels are a giant multi-translated mess, subject to political and theological meddling by the authors and by factions within the early church and within the Roman empires.[/quote]
Saying only non-Christian evidence is a "Tails-I-Win, Heads-You-Lose" statement as most evidence will be from Christians. But with regards to your opinion I will show some historical evidence of Jesus that are non-christian.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus
Wikipedia clearly shows most Scholars agree he existed, now to move onto the non-Christian evidence of miracles:
Here is a great link with links to the stuff it quotes:
http://thedevineevidence.com/jesus_history.html
More so this ( http://moriel.org/MorielArchive/index.p ... c-miracles ) makes a good read after knowing this: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_in_the_Talmud

The most of this is from Jewish Scholars who did not believe Jesus was the messiah. I can dip into the see of records again if needed but for now I will leave it with those.

As for the multi-translated mess, that isn't as true as you make seem. Every (Good) Bible translation is not translated from an existing translated version. No they translate it from the oldest original texts they can find and use scholars to find what is actually original and what was added by scribes etc. later. In many modern Bibles you find footnotes saying "some Bibles have bla bla but this may have been an additive" etc.

Also, it's been a few days. But what do you mean by meddling?
"i put on my robe and wizard hat" ~Pkdragon
"rocks fall everyone dies" ~HPD
Welcome to the optimistic world of WWN :D

And logic doesn't work on MysteriousLad... ~Kireato
Wait, wait, wait.

Organized crime is selling bagels on television? Since when? ~Dragon Fogel

User avatar
Dragonite
Rank: My face is beaming.
Location: the netherlands(mostly)

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by Dragonite » Wed Aug 27, 2014 7:40 am

Loaded draft here from yeaterday I wanted to finish(you might guess what got me sidetracked). It's in reply to ML's last response.

In my view, the Status Quo is everything in the world happening a natural/mundane reason. Supernatural is called that for a reason. In your court example you used ''guilty'' for something being faked, and innocent if it's true. However, with how natural and supernatural works, it's more apt to deem regular ''normal'' world, and natural human healing is the innocent, and anything supernatural, why by definition defies what's natural, should be the ''guilty'' one. The burden with evidence for something that defies normal reality if with you, in other words.

I noticed that in this topic(especially with you making it and starting the subject), you're been arguing from your own current status quo of having a Christian wordview, and taking the Christian interpretation of everything, with us trying to prove it wrong. Status quo thought is completely normal, and tricky to avoid in a subject as huge as thing, but still, pointing it out.

We also haven't touched the possibility that a other source of supernatural somethingism(thanks Plasterk) being responsible for the healings if they are indeed genuine. Other religions also claim healing, and you must likely assume all of those are either frauds, or having to do with the Devil(tell me if it's something else). Otherwise you would be guilty of so-called ''special pleading'', treating your own beliefs more favorably the other possibilities.


And about the ''pillars'', well, it's something in reverse from what I've seen somebody detailling in a youtube video on his own deconversion. Basically, holding a theistic position usually relies on multiple concepts that convince you, just not one. I applied this later as having a few main reasons why I'm so staunchly naturalistic nowadays. I can PM you the playlist if you wish, but it's a long slog to watch through in English(although it's very visual, well narrated, and has good background music).

User avatar
MysteriousLad
Rank: Mysterious President
Location: In your computer.

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by MysteriousLad » Wed Aug 27, 2014 3:58 pm

Dragonite wrote:Loaded draft here from yeaterday I wanted to finish(you might guess what got me sidetracked). It's in reply to ML's last response.

In my view, the Status Quo is everything in the world happening a natural/mundane reason. Supernatural is called that for a reason. In your court example you used ''guilty'' for something being faked, and innocent if it's true. However, with how natural and supernatural works, it's more apt to deem regular ''normal'' world, and natural human healing is the innocent, and anything supernatural, why by definition defies what's natural, should be the ''guilty'' one. The burden with evidence for something that defies normal reality if with you, in other words.

I noticed that in this topic(especially with you making it and starting the subject), you're been arguing from your own current status quo of having a Christian wordview, and taking the Christian interpretation of everything, with us trying to prove it wrong. Status quo thought is completely normal, and tricky to avoid in a subject as huge as thing, but still, pointing it out.

We also haven't touched the possibility that a other source of supernatural somethingism(thanks Plasterk) being responsible for the healings if they are indeed genuine. Other religions also claim healing, and you must likely assume all of those are either frauds, or having to do with the Devil(tell me if it's something else). Otherwise you would be guilty of so-called ''special pleading'', treating your own beliefs more favorably the other possibilities.


And about the ''pillars'', well, it's something in reverse from what I've seen somebody detailling in a youtube video on his own deconversion. Basically, holding a theistic position usually relies on multiple concepts that convince you, just not one. I applied this later as having a few main reasons why I'm so staunchly naturalistic nowadays. I can PM you the playlist if you wish, but it's a long slog to watch through in English(although it's very visual, well narrated, and has good background music).
I know of the burden of proof topic but that wasn't what I was trying to show. I was saying that there are real miracles (so much fraud these days) and they have this evidence:
1. Person fully healed of some ailment/disease/disorder, proven by medical records after medical assessment.
2. Multiple witnesses including himself saying it happened after a prayer.
3. They people praying are Christian.

So from this you can draw two conclusions from these world views:
1. Theistic view, I believe in a personal God. If there is one that would instantly make miracles possible as he can do the impossible. In that case we would say he was healed by an external force.
2. Naturalistic explanation, Everything can be explained in natural terms, we cannot explain this. So we disregard it saying we don't yet know how to explain it.

These miracles happen often so this is explained.
1. Theistic; God heals people.
2. Naturalistic; A lot of coincidental occurrences of something we can't explain.

The thing is with a naturalistic view, all physical evidence for a Theistic God is simply shrugged off.
Further more what are your pillars then? What would you consider evidence that would "knock" them down?
I'll edit this later to reply on the rest.
Edit: Yes this wouldn't be evidence for a Christian God, it is just one for a Theistic God(s).
You can't start discussing which god is real, when we don't agree on wether there is one.
"i put on my robe and wizard hat" ~Pkdragon
"rocks fall everyone dies" ~HPD
Welcome to the optimistic world of WWN :D

And logic doesn't work on MysteriousLad... ~Kireato
Wait, wait, wait.

Organized crime is selling bagels on television? Since when? ~Dragon Fogel

User avatar
MysteriousLad
Rank: Mysterious President
Location: In your computer.

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by MysteriousLad » Wed Aug 27, 2014 9:00 pm

Terragent wrote:(the old testament is a giant pile of nonsense - its dates are directly contradicted by archaeological evidence in modern Israel and Egypt as well as broadly disagreeing with contemporary accounts from Egypt and Mesopotamia)
I once again must ask you to clarify what you mean here, there are plenty of events with physical evidence backing up the Bibles claims. Take a few from here fore instance: http://www.apologeticspress.org/apconte ... ticle=1347
The cyrus cylinder is one to name:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyrus_Cylinder
Dragonite wrote:We also haven't touched the possibility that a other source of supernatural somethingism(thanks Plasterk) being responsible for the healings if they are indeed genuine. Other religions also claim healing, and you must likely assume all of those are either frauds, or having to do with the Devil(tell me if it's something else). Otherwise you would be guilty of so-called ''special pleading'', treating your own beliefs more favorably the other possibilities.
If anyone opens up discussion on some other "supernatural somethingism" that's what this topic is currently for. Anyone willing to do so I'd highly encourage them. Dragonite could you provide some of these other healings?
I believe the satan or "his demons" can explain them. Here's a quote from a website on demonic healing:
Paranormal/Demonic Healing has been in existence in the world practically since the creation. It is the oldest healing art. But the problem with this type of healing is that it is a (1) lying wonder and (2) opens the door to demonic influence, demonization, even possession. A lying wonder is not necessarily a false wonder or false miracle, but it is, more importantly, a miracle claimed to be from God but whose source is really from the devil. It is important to understand that actual healing can come from a lying wonder. But it is a type of healing that leads the person into bondage to the enemy. It is often used to confirm the alleged power of an individual, but behind it come the deceptions of the enemy. It's like a fish trap. The bait in the trap is real food and will nourish the fish that eats is, but after he is finished he is inside of a trap, whether or not he realizes it. There is much evidence also that suggests that this type of healing is a shell game of the enemy. By that I mean that the original condition was caused by the enemy, then when it is brought to a faith healer, witch doctor or shaman, the enemy cleverly lifts that condition only to replace it with other forms of demonization. This type of healing also, in many documented cases, may eventually lead to suicide and death. We must also remember that lying begets lying. People who get this kind of healing become part of the deception themselves, in turn deceiving others. It is an insidious form of healing that must be avoided at all costs.
Just as in Christian Biblical terms you could see mohammed as a false prophet;
2 Peter 2:1 ESV wrote: But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction.
and as for their "wonders":
Matthew 24:24 ESV wrote: For false christs and false prophets will arise and perform great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect.
This would also apply to other non-Christian religions in Biblical view.
"i put on my robe and wizard hat" ~Pkdragon
"rocks fall everyone dies" ~HPD
Welcome to the optimistic world of WWN :D

And logic doesn't work on MysteriousLad... ~Kireato
Wait, wait, wait.

Organized crime is selling bagels on television? Since when? ~Dragon Fogel

ThunderWalker
Rank: Elf
Location: Netherlands

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by ThunderWalker » Thu Aug 28, 2014 7:42 pm


This would also apply to other non-Christian religions in Biblical view.
*yaaaaaaaaaaaaawn*

Problem with that point of view is that all other religions believe the very same.
All religions believe they are proclaming the truth. All.

There are a few exceptions in that regard - the Islam has clearly Christian roots and does not deny it.
The archangel talking to Mohammed was Gabriel after all, which is also present in the Bible. Mohammed is also just a prophet.

While it maybe sounds like idiotic to you, to me the entire idea of an archangel or even God existing is just as idiotic.

Also, the example you gave is indeed proven truth, but the stuff with the 7 days in the first part of Genesis is just absolute and complete crumpets and you know it. No matter how you put it - even if the 7 days are a metaphor for millions upon millions of years - it simply cannot be correct.

Also, the enormous Santorini Eruption in 1650 BC had some influence on the early part of the Bible. Without any knowledge about natural disasters, let alone volcanoes, they just subscribed those events to a deity - God in this case - instead of looking for a logical explanation. A positive deity (God), as the eruption was advantageous to them (if it wasn't, Satan would be blamed instead I guess, but we never know).
1. Person fully healed of some ailment/disease/disorder, proven by medical records after medical assessment.
2. Multiple witnesses including himself saying it happened after a prayer.
3. They people praying are Christian.
Wat.

I know various similar instances outside of Christianity. The Muslims have similar stories and so did the Ancient Greek and Egyptians. Other religions probably too.
Reiki and healings exist though their effectivity depends on how strong someone's belief is, depending on both the receiver and the giver.
Aboriginals have unknown naturalistic ways to heal injuries too if I remember correctly.
My sig is a void.

User avatar
MysteriousLad
Rank: Mysterious President
Location: In your computer.

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by MysteriousLad » Thu Aug 28, 2014 9:08 pm

ThunderWalker wrote:

This would also apply to other non-Christian religions in Biblical view.
*yaaaaaaaaaaaaawn*

Problem with that point of view is that all other religions believe the very same.
All religions believe they are proclaming the truth. All.

There are a few exceptions in that regard - the Islam has clearly Christian roots and does not deny it.
The archangel talking to Mohammed was Gabriel after all, which is also present in the Bible. Mohammed is also just a prophet.

While it maybe sounds like idiotic to you, to me the entire idea of an archangel or even God existing is just as idiotic.

Also, the example you gave is indeed proven truth, but the stuff with the 7 days in the first part of Genesis is just absolute and complete crumpets and you know it. No matter how you put it - even if the 7 days are a metaphor for millions upon millions of years - it simply cannot be correct.

Also, the enormous Santorini Eruption in 1650 BC had some influence on the early part of the Bible. Without any knowledge about natural disasters, let alone volcanoes, they just subscribed those events to a deity - God in this case - instead of looking for a logical explanation. A positive deity (God), as the eruption was advantageous to them (if it wasn't, Satan would be blamed instead I guess, but we never know).
1. Person fully healed of some ailment/disease/disorder, proven by medical records after medical assessment.
2. Multiple witnesses including himself saying it happened after a prayer.
3. They people praying are Christian.
Wat.

I know various similar instances outside of Christianity. The Muslims have similar stories and so did the Ancient Greek and Egyptians. Other religions probably too.
Reiki and healings exist though their effectivity depends on how strong someone's belief is, depending on both the receiver and the giver.
Aboriginals have unknown naturalistic ways to heal injuries too if I remember correctly.
I agree alot with your statements on Genesis, I as said before am an Old Earth Creationist and believe that the Genesis accounts are very metaphorical. It is written in an amolst poetic way which is also ised in other areas of the bible often paired with such symbolisms and metaphors. As such I stated my views on Evolution and Creation bla bla are subject to change if some evidence rears its ugly head. Genesis is also Mosas describing what he saw as God showed him how he made the earth. They had no knowledge of advanced physics etc. so when it's written "let there be light" then it could of actually just been the existence of energy, which they had no knowledge on.

I do not know of the volcano however, altough I don't know any examples. People may of made mistakes and linked stuff to God wrongly as they didn't know what it was. However God may of caused a volcano to erupt so this is a bit of a "meh" matter.

Once again with the healings, it's an argument for something "more than naturalism's view". A deity or force of some kind that is not a physical entity, not necciserliy the Christian God. But as God is a "non-physical" entity it can count as evidence for him, however you are correct I cannot use it as my only evidence for my "case for God", it's my a side evidence which can confirm more direct proper evidence.
"i put on my robe and wizard hat" ~Pkdragon
"rocks fall everyone dies" ~HPD
Welcome to the optimistic world of WWN :D

And logic doesn't work on MysteriousLad... ~Kireato
Wait, wait, wait.

Organized crime is selling bagels on television? Since when? ~Dragon Fogel

User avatar
monkymeet
Rank: Bitch
3DS Code: 3480-3067-3928
Contact:

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by monkymeet » Fri Aug 29, 2014 4:35 am

I'm not quite sure if i understood what you said. Did you say you ARE an Old Earth Creationist? Because Evolution is literally the strongest scientific theory we have. We have more proof and understanding of it that, say, gravity. Anyone arguing against evolution clearly doesn't understand any biology, or science for that matter.

You keep on referring to the bible, but I'm pretty sure it's not a very reliable source. It's even notorious for contradicting itself numerous times. What's to say Jesus isn't a false prophet and only the Old Testament is true? What if Mohammed is a real prophet as well as Jesus? Hell, what if the Baha'i are correct in that all major religions are correct and all prophets are merely avatars for a true God? You can't just wave away all other religious texts in favour of the one you believe in. What evidence is there that suggests the Bible is any more accurate than the Qur'an?
imageshack swallowed up my sig. This is a placeholder.

User avatar
Sven

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by Sven » Fri Aug 29, 2014 5:15 am

i'd heard the term used to describe catholics back in highschool, intelligent design was another term.

in my case i understood that they 100% believed evolution was the mechanism god used to shape living things into what he wanted, not that they didn't believe in evolution. the idea was that as we uncovered more and more mysteries of the universe we began to uncover more and more of how god designed our universe.

User avatar
Dragonite
Rank: My face is beaming.
Location: the netherlands(mostly)

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by Dragonite » Fri Aug 29, 2014 9:31 am

MysteriousLad wrote: I know of the burden of proof topic but that wasn't what I was trying to show. I was saying that there are real miracles (so much fraud these days) and they have this evidence:
1. Person fully healed of some ailment/disease/disorder, proven by medical records after medical assessment.
2. Multiple witnesses including himself saying it happened after a prayer.
3. They people praying are Christian.

So from this you can draw two conclusions from these world views:
1. Theistic view, I believe in a personal God. If there is one that would instantly make miracles possible as he can do the impossible. In that case we would say he was healed by an external force.
2. Naturalistic explanation, Everything can be explained in natural terms, we cannot explain this. So we disregard it saying we don't yet know how to explain it.

These miracles happen often so this is explained.
1. Theistic; God heals people.
2. Naturalistic; A lot of coincidental occurrences of something we can't explain.

The thing is with a naturalistic view, all physical evidence for a Theistic God is simply shrugged off.
Further more what are your pillars then? What would you consider evidence that would "knock" them down?
I'll edit this later to reply on the rest.
Edit: Yes this wouldn't be evidence for a Christian God, it is just one for a Theistic God(s).
You can't start discussing which god is real, when we don't agree on wether there is one.

Something I notice here(thunderwalker somwhat touched on this), is that you present 3 sub-arguments with confidence, and then skip ahead to the choice between the two conclusions to be drawn from your conclusion. However, everybody you're arguing with doesn't automatically accept the sub-arguments. How those faith healing stories are presented, the manner they are conducted in, and especially the things that tend to be wrong with them, follow set patterns, and it isn't a nice one.

I used to take the ''miracle or unlikely coincidence'' choice at face value, but after gaining some experience with the topic, I found out one thing: You'll never get to see the whole picture.

As I alluded to before, faith healing focuses on things that are often not very clearly visible. I must press you on this point: why are amputees never healed? It would be a highly visual miracle, yet it never happens. And we only hear the success stories, and even of those only the facts that make it seem more impressive. You remember I visited the site of the organisation you've been to a few pages back? I was genuinely startled by the story I linked to, but then I looked up the specific heart disease up. And what I found was that people commonly recover from it on their own. Yet the article didn't mention this at all, instead devoting a few paragraphs explaining how miserable she was before the healing event. It's all set up in the most emotional way possible, with no sad failures reported, and all information not needed to produce the emotional story omitted. Should a disease come back you'll never hear from it from the people involved in the healing. The main goal is often to report as many miracles as possible. I don't like to be a jerk, but perhaps you're a bit quick to trust them on their word.

I know you said a friend was healed but... placebo effect is widely documented and is known to be powerful at times. This is probably the reason why other religions have similar practices. Sometimes unusual healing also happens in a non-religious context, but since it lacks such a context it's not touted as a healing.

Anyway, we're not really getting anywhere like this arguing the broad specifics. I'm convinced of it being a shady or misguided practice, and you got a firm faith in it. I'm mostly wondering how you got it.

Can you go into more specifics how you got introduced to the concept, by whom, and what exactly made you as a person convinced of it?


And back into the pillars bit, I guess my wording mostly stems from having OCD problems from it, which made me more active deconverting then most people(who usually try to fight it until their reasons to believe erode).

If I have to specific them:

1 My personal experience is rather horrible, I've had compulsive tendencies , and intrusive thoughts with faith since 2009. Think of it like the thought police.. I worried about God with most actions I took, and even my thoughts.. I was really afraid of doing evil stuff or things that would't be approved off, and generally it was incredibly draconian. You don't seem to have a problem worrying about everything, sort of turning the religious mood switch off when not doing something faith-specific. Well, I couldn't. Okay, it didn't happen 24/7, but I had no real control of it, and during some rather bad episode it did became more or less 24/7. I noticed it altered based on the information I got from my environment, conservative claims would make it worse, getting more liberal information would sometimes ease it. Since it was so inconsistent, I turned to prayed to more or less get guidance, or to just make the horrible thoughts stop. (Something else what would happen if that I would keep thinking satanic things, because eventually developed a phobia for it after stumbling on the wrong stuff online. I know it was just my head because I didn't have them before I developed the specific fear). Sometimes I did have a feeling I was getting aide a time, but it mostly resulted in a oddly manic period of happiness that felt wrong somewhere, and after a while I would end up getting fearful again. Basically, I still get a enraged/saddened feeling whenever somebody talks to me about feeling God aiding them. And worst of it all I still feel vulnerable of it happening again. Being vulnerable to OCD is still in my personality. Aside from trauma, this also convinced me that personal God experience is generated by our own minds. Mine just seems broken.. I sent you a link to a more in detail story you've read. You can try reading it again for more specifics, or a rough timeline.

2 I also engaged in compulsive bible reading. That was my first experience reading some more of the more unpleasant passages. Relevation already creeped me out before with it's violence, the old testament had dozens of bizarrely complex rules, and extremely violent passages. According to the stories they basically plundered Canaan, killing almost everybody, except girls who had use to taken as wives(without their consent being needed of course). It also has slavery, with brutal laws specified, and non-Hebrew people having no human rights whatsoever. And ''it was a different time and place'' is not a excuse for the supposed most wise and good being in existence. He had no qualms at using excessive miracle violence for pressure anyway, so trying to say it was no use trying get the Hebrews to behave morally is illogical. It simply doesn't inspire much confidence as God's Chosen people by the Moral Creator.

Aside from that, as Terr said, most of the Old Testament isn't historical. The exodus never happened, there's evidence the people of Israel emerged peacefully from people already living there. There was a kingdom, and quite a few of the kings did exist, but the real history is quite different(and more interesting if I can say so). The fact Israel consisted of two Kingdoms, Israel and Judah, is especially important. Yaweh worship developed in a very specific way.Not going in to much detail unless asked, but wikipedia has a lot of info, and I can recommend The bible Unearthed to you for more details. It's a book, but it also was made into a tv series uploaded on youtube. It's a daunting task(I must admit I need a refresher on many specifics myself), but if you want to debate this later down the line, get familiar with the timeline of Israel, dates and all, and at least have a honest look in what current historians believe what's been the true history of the area.

Many of the stories in the OT also unfold in a very neat way for narrative and symbolism. I know you think of early Genesis as symbolic already, but the stories about Abraham,Isaac, and Jacob, Moses, David.. They have the same qualities, and yet believers think of those as history. Youngest sons being special, generations of heroics, betrayals, failures and triumphs, all emotions are there. I honestly think many of them are great stories(Joseph may be my favorite), but... it's all to neat. It forms a narrative. Everything happens in patterns with all events having a specific dramatic impact, and many details having a layer of symbolism. Only stories behave this way, yet it's the fundament for why Israel got it's Chosen status in the first place.

3 It's really late, and I've been over this before anyway recently. I don't think the natural world, evolution, basically everything related to humanity that's observable stuff makes any sense if try making a omnipotent God responsible for it. Evolution specifically means natural selection. If God guided it, it's not that, it's creationism. Yet everything points to natural selection anyway.
Last edited by Dragonite on Fri Aug 29, 2014 8:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
MysteriousLad
Rank: Mysterious President
Location: In your computer.

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by MysteriousLad » Fri Aug 29, 2014 6:06 pm

Dragonite I will reply in order so I'm not just skipping your post here.
monkymeet wrote:I'm not quite sure if i understood what you said. Did you say you ARE an Old Earth Creationist? Because Evolution is literally the strongest scientific theory we have. We have more proof and understanding of it that, say, gravity. Anyone arguing against evolution clearly doesn't understand any biology, or science for that matter.
Wether Evolution is the stronget theory there is is up for debate but that would need it's whole own topic as it's a massive irritating disccussion which ends up nowhere as neither side can proove their point. We all have had "experiences" which lead us to believe what we believe, and when we believe, we tend to seem 100% convinced with it. So to different people with give different opinions on that, take Sir Francis Collins; he is a Creationist. As said before, my views on this subject are subject to change.
You keep on referring to the bible, but I'm pretty sure it's not a very reliable source. It's even notorious for contradicting itself numerous times. What's to say Jesus isn't a false prophet and only the Old Testament is true? What if Mohammed is a real prophet as well as Jesus? Hell, what if the Baha'i are correct in that all major religions are correct and all prophets are merely avatars for a true God? You can't just wave away all other religious texts in favour of the one you believe in. What evidence is there that suggests the Bible is any more accurate than the Qur'an?
Could you possibly say why it's unreliable and where the contradictions are? You may not be one of them but many people blidly state this as others told them that it's so. The False Prophet doctrine came because of Jesus, he also resurrected from the Dead and people like John as witnesses say that God made that very clear through speaking to them. The Bible is more valid because of the exact reason, prophecies made by Jews all being fuffiled through Jesus.
"i put on my robe and wizard hat" ~Pkdragon
"rocks fall everyone dies" ~HPD
Welcome to the optimistic world of WWN :D

And logic doesn't work on MysteriousLad... ~Kireato
Wait, wait, wait.

Organized crime is selling bagels on television? Since when? ~Dragon Fogel

ThunderWalker
Rank: Elf
Location: Netherlands

Re: WWN's Debate Topic: Religion; Is there a God?

Post by ThunderWalker » Fri Aug 29, 2014 9:11 pm

The Bible contradicts itself incredibly often. You can look it up yourself, it's like everywhere.
A few examples: http://www.answering-christianity.com/1 ... ctions.htm
It was the first or second link that popped up when typing "Bible Contradictions" in Google.

Also, only using the Bible as proof for other parts of the Bible isn't going to help your argument. I still have no sources seen from you (or others) to support your argument.
My sig is a void.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest