Science Vs Religion

[mountainhare]

I apologise for insulting you, the truth is, I don’t know you, so my insults were purely superficial.

Thank you. And I apoligize as well for my insults

If there is no literature, on the subject of “the existence of unicorns”, then I am at a disadvantage, as I neither currently believe or dis-believe in their existence, and believe it would make the argument, pointless. My belief in God came about, not just through faith, but information passed down for thousands of years, and recorded in literature, which i am currently studying.
So my request is, please get more detailed information, especially from people who claim to have proof of their existence, and we’ll take it from there.

THIS ISN'T ABOUT THAT. This is about showing that you CANNOT PROVE A NON-EXISTENCE CLAIM. Grrrr. Just admit it. Admit you can't disprove my unicorn. You're just trying to dodge and escape the inevitable. You can't disprove my unicorn, its impossible.
That's what it is like for an atheist. NOT ONE PERSON CAN PROVE GOD DOESN'T EXIST. IT'S IMPOSSIBLE.


If you believed in gremlins, little purple guys, and told me to disprove them, I would be screwed. I can't disprove gremlins.

If you told me that the knife O.J Simpson used to murder his wife exists, and is being held by the Mafia, I can't disprove that knife doesn't exist. I could go to every mafioso member and ask, but they wouldn't tell me, would they??? I could dance about and say that knife doesn't exist, but I can't disprove the existance of the knife.

Even better, Jan, prove to me that Buddha, Sri Krishna, Allah, Gaia, Aries, Zeus and Ying/Yang don't exist. They have books written about themselves too!!! Why didn't you choose to worship those gods??? You were born into your religion. I doubt you chose.
I think you are pretty lucky that you were born in a country that worship the 'true' god (sarcasm intended)


Now, let's look at another fact...
"IT IS VERY EASY TO PROVE SOMETHING EXISTS"
All I need is one photo of a pink unicorn, one photo of a gremlin, one reindeer seen flying, and you have proven your point. One giant cross in the sky with the words "Believe or Burn!!!"
Is their any PROOF that god exists? NO. Then why should I believe? Why? Why should you believe in my unicorn since I don't have any proof? Blind faith is stupid.

Oh yeah, how do you know the Bible is truth? I could make up a load of garbage about my unicorn, called "The Saga of the Unicorn" In this book, my unicorn creates the world through unicorn magick, and he made WOMAN first, and then the unicorn made man because woman was bored. And this man and woman lived in a land with rivers of sugar candy, the trees are made of chocolate, and the grass is, err, lemon sherbert.
Now tell me, why would you choose the Bible over my unicorn saga?

Then we must start a philosophical debate, and at least we can give reasonable explanations, by relating our ideas to our situation.

Fine. I KNOW god doesn't exist, just like I know the earth is round, the sun will rise tomorrow, and gravity hold me to the earth.

That may be, but the fact remains that you are still making a claim, and can be required to prove it, if asked.

Can't prove a non-existence claim my dear.

 

[Jan Ardena]

THIS ISN'T ABOUT THAT. This is about showing that you CANNOT PROVE A NON-EXISTENCE CLAIM. Grrrr. Just admit it. Admit you can't disprove my unicorn. You're just trying to dodge and escape the inevitable. You can't disprove my unicorn, its impossible.

Calm down!
I am not trying to dodge or escape anything, for me to know a pink unicorn does not exist, I would have to be sure from every angle, just to say one does not or never has existed from my current position, would be a, statement based on ignorance.

That's what it is like for an atheist. NOT ONE PERSON CAN PROVE GOD DOESN'T EXIST. IT'S IMPOSSIBLE.

It is impossible to prove anything to someone who is determined to suppress their mind and intelligence, and who only uses their eyes for acquiring knowledge, and takes the words of bogus authorities.

If you told me that the knife O.J Simpson used to murder his wife exists, and is being held by the Mafia, I can't disprove that knife doesn't exist.

Can you prove the knife does exist?

Why didn't you choose to worship those gods??? You were born into your religion.

What exactly do you know about me, that you can tell me what and what I don’t (or do for that matter) worship?

I doubt you chose.

I was captured and sold into the unga-boonga religion.

I think you are pretty lucky that you were born in a country that worship the 'true' god (sarcasm intended)

Which country would that be?

All I need is one photo of a pink unicorn, one photo of a gremlin, one reindeer seen flying, and you have proven your point.

So a photo would prove its existence, eh!
Poor you!

Now tell me, why would you choose the Bible over my unicorn saga?

From a neutral perspective, it would appear that you are a basing the unicorn saga, on the bible, which is far more detailed and complete (the bible), thus there would be no need to even read your sage. You would have to complete the whole unicorn book thing, and it would have to comply with other unicorn sagas from different parts of the world, and relate in great detail, the origin of the world, its maintenance and ultimate destruction. And most importantly, if it did not relate to the human condition, as does the books of the bible, when understood to some degree or other, then it wouldn’t attract me.

Fine. I KNOW god doesn't exist, just like I know the earth is round, the sun will rise tomorrow, and gravity hold me to the earth.

I know God exists, because these thing exist.

Can't prove a non-existence claim my dear.

Then don’t make them.

Love

Jan Ardena.

 

[Dr Lou Natic]

I can prove to you the existence of a hornless unicorn....

OBSERVE...

aha!
This proves that science is a farce! Clearly God made this hornless unicorn!

 

[Jan Ardena]

Originally posted by SnakeLord

exactly what manner the bible is to be taken.

Like any book, it is taken in the manner of the person reading it.

Is this god talking? Is this man accidentally turning it into plural? I concur god isn't speaking about or to himself- it shows he's talking to 'others' of his kind.

Read Al Qur’an.

If it is metaphor what's to say the rest of the bible isn't also?

There is nothing to suggest that it is a metaphor, other than the fact that we do not fully understand it. When we understand it, then we are in a better position to judge.

Who made these hellish beings?

The hellish beings are also souls, but they have become degraded, due to their previous activities. (Karma)

My daughter says she's going to Johannesberg no matter what i say. Because i fear she might get hurt over there i take out a gun and shoot her in the head. Does that sound loving?

That is nonsense. God anihilated every living creature, bar some, because “all mankind had evil intent”, now if you don’t understand “evil intent”, then say so, but don’t put your own version in there, to justify your simplistic understanding.

Does he mean all souls are a part of him, or that he owns all souls? We have agreed we are here to serve. As our master, god seems to be pointing out his ownership, not that we are part of him.

Both. Some souls, foolishly, want to be separated from Him, so He gives them the illusion they seek, but regardless of what He still owns them. And the souls that seek to love God, are already a part of Him.

If your whole slave camp are going against you, you drown them all,

Do you want to believe that God drowned everyone because they were against Him, regardless of the scriptoral injunctions?
If so, then you may as well end the discussion, as nothing more can really be argued.

d would it be to obey hitler? How hard would it be to obey Stalin? How hard would it be to obey Saddam? Notice a distinct pattern emerging? We are slaves.

You are chatting nonsense, God gave Adam and Eve every comfort, and told them they could eat froml the trees provided, bar one.
I don’t get the feeling they were enslaved, as slaves get no comfort.

If love is involved you never need to obey. You can do so by choice but you never get drowned for doing something else.

For the last time, mankind was anihilated because all of it had evil intent. If you cannot understand that, then why bother respond to me, you may as well deem yourself right and be done with it.

I made a car but for some reason the wheels kept dragging to the left. That's not the cars fault, it's mine as the designer.

This is very hard work.
There is no design fault with Adam, the design was complete. Adam, DECIDED, to use his FREEWILL, and as a result, fell from the personal protection of God.
Try and understand, instead of trying not to understand.

Well it isn't 'independance' if god knows the outcome beforehand.

This is a silly, disruptive and devicive argument.
And I won’t waste any energy on it. I’m sure there are lots of threads on this.

So it's serious to go against god? That is slavery.

You may not understand this, but I’ll say it anyway, if you go against God, you go against yourself, which is serious, and yes, does cause slavery, as Adam and Eve found out.

You answer that..

I asked you the question, so please answer it. What are you afraid of?

There will always be bad people, for we were made in the image of god.

You don’t have an argument do you?
I'm simply wasting my time, aren't I.

Work and service have no bearing on love. We work and serve because we have no other choice, as you said, but the same does not apply to love.

This obviously applies to you, but it doesn’t apply to me.

Because she wanted to. If there was love, it wouldn't have been so bad- if it was slavery the outcome would be eternal damnation.

It was because she tempted Adam, they fell, not that they ate the apple, and God punished them for disobeying.
Are we reading the same book?

Ok, then i hope you study Sumerian.

What are you trying to say?

No, they mean mortal space travellers. Nothing to suggest that isn't correct, nothing to say your god is.

Seeing how you are explaining the bible, I wouldn’t dream of trusting what you say those scriptures are implying, so please, if you like, post the context.

They showed true panic when man tried to build into the heavens, knowing eventually we would become greater then they are.

Whatever!

Love

Jan Ardena.

 

[SnakeLord]

Like any book, it is taken in the manner of the person reading it

Well that can be a bit of a problem. When i was in my younger years my English teacher told the class to do some homework. Bascially we had to put the meaning to the poem 'the pike'. Everyone handed in their work- i handed in a blank sheet of a4 paper, with my name signed on the bottom.

Everyone had given their own interpretations but does anyone have the right to say their interpretation is true or anywhere near truth? Of course not, only the author does. The teacher asked me why i handed in a blank sheet of paper and that was my response. I got an A.

With your quote in mind the same applies to the bible. As such nobody is in a position to say "There is a god". The author could tell you what he was referring to, show why he wrote what he did etc but alas he is dead and buried. (i know it was written by many people, i'm just explaining in efficient manner so use author as opposed to authors). This doesn't deviate from the same stance though- The original authors meanings, perspective and belief would have been handed down through the generations, changed somewhat due to chinese whispers and personal new authors additions etc. As such what makes anyone think the bible can be seen as a valid piece of writing, even going so far as to use it as proof of a godly being? Surely everyone should then agree nobody can be overly presumptuous to state god as a reality?

Read Al Qur’an.

I will. However it is a different book. When a jewish person or christian sits down and reads the bible it will be shown that god talks in plurals. Without knowledge of the Qur'an how should this text be taken? Word of god, or word of man? Most will attest to the bible being the written word of god. Many say it cannot be added to or taken away from in which case the qur'an would be pointless, (to them). Even minor issues throughout the entire bible where god says: "i am the lord god". That in itself can signify multiple gods. He might, as i stated earlier, be the boss- the lord, but theres nothing to say he's the one and only. Then he said stuff like, "I am the god of Bethel" - why say god of bethel? Why not just say "I am god"? It is just a minor issue but he should at least be precise. As i have said but people decline from discussing even the word Elohim is a plural word signifying many, not one. Now we can all interpret it any way we choose as you have stated but then how could anyone claim they have the correct meaning? As such anything you said about god etc is possibly as false as anyone elses in which case it's presumptuous to put your entire faith into it. Unless of course you do so through fear- if your version is right but you ignored it you'll burn in hell. Living a life through fear isn't good.

There is nothing to suggest that it is a metaphor, other than the fact that we do not fully understand it. When we understand it, then we are in a better position to judge.

As nobody understands it we could all be doing wrong by worshipping within our current religion. We could all be destined to hell because we don't understand the text that was written. We don't understand the text that was written because apparently the god/gods confused mankinds language. Thus if that's the case he/they would be at fault for our lack of understanding and our eventual burning in hell for not being able to understand what is written. As such isn't it overly presumputous for anyone to claim they know the truth?

The hellish beings are also souls, but they have become degraded, due to their previous activities. (Karma)

I didn't ask what they were, i asked who made them. However can i assume from your very 'matter of fact' sentence that you know this to be true? Any proof to suggest what you state?

That is nonsense. God anihilated every living creature, bar some, because “all mankind had evil intent”, now if you don’t understand “evil intent”, then say so, but don’t put your own version in there, to justify your simplistic understanding.

I copied your analogy so it would be your simplistic understanding, not mine. Not to mention i asked you a good few times to tell me what 'evil intent' signifies. What's that bad it requires the total anihilation of everything, bar some, on this planet.

Both. Some souls, foolishly, want to be separated from Him, so He gives them the illusion they seek, but regardless of what He still owns them. And the souls that seek to love God, are already a part of Him.

If god gave man the ability to choose what he wanted, gave him free will nothing that man did could be regarded as foolish. If he jumped out in front of a car you and i could assume it as foolish but if thats what he wanted to do that would be his right as given by god. As such he could hardly be at fault, he was given that right. You then go on to say god gives them the illusion they seek- making it all the harder for them to find the christian truth and be saved.

As i mentioned twice before but it was ignored god specifically states that all males must be circumcised or they are going against god. How many males in the world, aside from the jews, are circumcised? In essence everybody is going against god one way or the other. We can sit here until the next millennium working out rules, regulations and procedures as stated by god but we will at some stage always break gods rules. Is loving god good enough to mean you can ignore his other rules? I don't think so... It states very clearly many times god wants man to fear him, not love him. This leads to questions about his true motives.

Do you want to believe that God drowned everyone because they were against Him, regardless of the scriptoral injunctions?
If so, then you may as well end the discussion, as nothing more can really be argued.

Oh so 'evil intent' isnt going against god? Well then kindly tell me what it is. Maybe im wrong- maybe everyone loved and was serving god and he drowned them anyway- you tell me.

You are chatting nonsense, God gave Adam and Eve every comfort, and told them they could eat froml the trees provided, bar one.
I don’t get the feeling they were enslaved, as slaves get no comfort.

Of course they do. Look at the past black slaves of America- they were slaves but still got some comforts. Giving comfort for servitude is a good method. Give a slave a bottle of whisky here, a bottle of whisky there and he'll be more of a slave than the other slaves. Either way the slave driver will make it so they lose out in the end.

For the last time, mankind was anihilated because all of it had evil intent. If you cannot understand that, then why bother respond to me, you may as well deem yourself right and be done with it.

Evil intent, such a vague word. So does that mean they were going against god? I guess so if god felt the need to drown them all but then why did you say "Do you want to believe that God drowned everyone because they were against Him, regardless of the scriptoral injunctions"?

This is very hard work.
There is no design fault with Adam, the design was complete. Adam, DECIDED, to use his FREEWILL, and as a result, fell from the personal protection of God.
Try and understand, instead of trying not to understand.

By the same token i give my car wheels the ability to swerve left and right, then when they do i curse the car?

This is a silly, disruptive and devicive argument.
And I won’t waste any energy on it. I’m sure there are lots of threads on this.

Im sure there are, for obvious reason. Run away from answering if you feel like it, that's your right.

You may not understand this, but I’ll say it anyway, if you go against God, you go against yourself, which is serious, and yes, does cause slavery, as Adam and Eve found out.

If its your choice to go against god you're not going against yourself, you are in fact agreeing with yourself and doing what you want to do. That's not slavery. Of course doing as you want to do as a free man is pointless because as you said 'you still belong to god' so the freedom is short lived and you are in fact still a slave to god. So saying we have freedom to choose is just a pretence? We are still owned by god and as such have only one choice we can make unless we want to burn forever. That's not freedom, that's slavery coated with pretend sugar.

asked you the question, so please answer it. What are you afraid of?

Several things... The thought of cancer gives me the chills and im not a particular fan of being alone in the dark- werewolves scare me. As for the death penalty- It's not as simple as it seems. Who really is guilty? The guy who did the killing or the parents who abused him etc etc.... the things we do have specific bearing on the things that happen during our life. Killing someone for killing someone is just as bad imo.

You don’t have an argument do you?
I'm simply wasting my time, aren't I.

I've left thousands upon thousands of words of argument. Most were completely ignored- in fact several entire posts were ignored.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Work and service have no bearing on love. We work and serve because we have no other choice, as you said, but the same does not apply to love.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This obviously applies to you, but it doesn’t apply to me.

In what way? You love because you have no other choice or you work and serve by choice? If you work and serve by choice that's fine- there's probably many people who want to serve by choice but can anyone who doesn't want to serve- because they have been given the right of choice- be punished for making a choice other than willingness to serve?

It was because she tempted Adam, they fell, not that they ate the apple, and God punished them for disobeying.
Are we reading the same book?

She tempted Adam? "She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it" Doesn't sound like much tempting was needed. But i have gone over this several times in that there's no justification to stop them listening to the serpent instead of god. Why wouldn't they?

What are you trying to say?

Well you said the truth remains as one in every scripture. By saying that you must have read all scriptures, but it seems you haven't read Sumerian. I hope you do. Scripture and mathematics are not the same thing.

Seeing how you are explaining the bible, I wouldn’t dream of trusting what you say those scriptures are implying, so please, if you like, post the context.

During our discussion over certain points in the bible you have mentioned the qur'an. I do the same but with Sumerian texts. It's a definite bonus to read them, i will do the same with the qur'an. One of the main things is evidence to show a lot of the bible is handed down stories from sumerian texts. That's where its relevance comes in to play. I will make a separate thread sometime today or tommorrow with Sumerian texts.

Whatever!

Good debating point. Read Tower of Babel section in the bible, (Gens 11)

 

[Jan Ardena]

Originally posted by SnakeLord

As nobody understands it we could all be doing wrong by worshipping within our current religion.

How do you know nobody understands it?

We could all be destined to hell because we don't understand the text that was written.

Don’t worry about all, worry about you and those who depend on you.

We don't understand the text that was written because apparently the god/gods confused mankinds language.

Doesn’t have anything to do with language, only what is in heart.

Thus if that's the case he/they would be at fault for our lack of understanding and our eventual burning in hell for not being able to understand what is written.

Not understanding is our problem, we have the capability through human intelligence.

As such isn't it overly presumputous for anyone to claim they know the truth?

People who are God-conscious, do not claim to know the truth, they are the truth, and just act naturally. ( The truth is not something that is written down, the writing down is there to help one realise through his own intelligence)

I didn't ask what they were, i asked who made them. However can i assume from your very 'matter of fact' sentence that you know this to be true? Any proof to suggest what you state?

God say’s “all souls are mine”, when He created Adam, he gathered the dirt from the ground and moulded the body. In other words He made the body from the earth, the material earth. So, the body belongs to the earth. When Adam fell from grace, he at once became aware of his body, before that, he had no reason to be. The hellish beings, are beings who have become opposite to their original state, due to their degraging activities, and so, their bodies reflect their mentality.

Not to mention i asked you a good few times to tell me what 'evil intent' signifies.

I gave you a small analogy, regarding the brutal murderer.

If god gave man the ability to choose what he wanted, gave him free will nothing that man did could be regarded as foolish.

In the case of Adam, it is because he had the choice he fell, and as such, given the odds, he was foolish.

As i mentioned twice before but it was ignored god specifically states that all males must be circumcised or they are going against god.

And as I have mentioned before but was ignored, God acts according to time, place and circumstance. You would have to know about, the culture at that particular time and place, to get some understanding as to why circumcision was important.

Of course they do. Look at the past black slaves of America- they were slaves but still got some comforts.

Please, let’s be serious.

By the same token i give my car wheels the ability to swerve left and right, then when they do i curse the car?

So you’re car wheels have a mind of there own?

Run away from answering if you feel like it, that's your right.

There’s no need to run, the argument put forward by athiests, is silly. Simple as that.
But if you have anything new to offer, to prove that God cannot be omniscient if man has freewill, then please feel free to do so.

If its your choice to go against god you're not going against yourself, you are in fact agreeing with yourself and doing what you want to do.

Is it alright to rape, steel and murder?

We are still owned by god and as such have only one choice we can make unless we want to burn forever. That's not freedom, that's slavery coated with pretend sugar.

The fact that you have 1 choice, means you have freewill. If you don’t like the idea of returning back to you original position, as loving servant of God, then you have to take your chances in the material world.

Who really is guilty? The guy who did the killing or the parents who…….

Come on! Answer the question and stop the dithering.
I said he was guilty beyond doubt, so would you be sorry if he was issued the death penalty?

She tempted Adam?

Yes, for Adam, there was no reason to go against God.

But i have gone over this several times in that there's no justification to stop them listening to the serpent instead of god. Why wouldn't they?

There is no “they”, Adam wasn’t the one tempted by the serpent, he had no affinity with the serpent class. Eve was the one who was convinced, then she convinced Adam, no doubt through her feminine charms, having got to understand them through her previous act.

Love

Jan Ardena.

 

[SnakeLord]

How do you know nobody understands it?

Well..... because there's a million different religions and we're all in here debating about it. If we all knew and understood this forum wouldn't exist.

Don’t worry about all, worry about you and those who depend on you.

Thanks for the advice..... was it part of this debate?

Doesn’t have anything to do with language, only what is in heart.

The point still stands. God/s confused mankind so they wouldn't understand each other and then spread us all over the world instead of keeping us as a community because he was worried nothing would be impossible for us if we remained as we were. (I use 'we' in reference to humankind). Mankinds confusion was handed down by god. Let's say im confused over the validity of god, thats not by choice- it was given to me.

Not understanding is our problem, we have the capability through human intelligence.

We do? Everyone has a different understanding- it's nothing to do with intelligence, it's to do with interpretation and personal understanding. Doesn't mean you understand it at all the way it should be understood. 4 billion+ people might very well disagree with your 'understanding'. I suppose it's down to their lack of intelligence?

People who are God-conscious, do not claim to know the truth, they are the truth, and just act naturally. ( The truth is not something that is written down, the writing down is there to help one realise through his own intelligence)

You sound as if you're claiming that to be true, No sorry- not claiming, insisting. What strikes me is this trendy use of the word 'intelligence'. in several of your responses. Kindly tell me what intelligence is and what its relation to god is.

God say’s “all souls are mine”, when He created Adam, he gathered the dirt from the ground and moulded the body. In other words He made the body from the earth, the material earth. So, the body belongs to the earth. When Adam fell from grace, he at once became aware of his body, before that, he had no reason to be. The hellish beings, are beings who have become opposite to their original state, due to their degraging activities, and so, their bodies reflect their mentality.

I take it the answer was 'no, i dont have any proof'?

As for your last sentence-mentality is not an issue. In fact people who commit atrocities usually are of much higher intelligence than most people. Intelligence hides itself very well..... look at Einstein-was a patent clerk doing physics in his spare time. People who shout their own intelligence from the rooftops generally are not. Not to mention intelligence can be very area specific. For instance i knew a guy who worked on the stock exchange- smart man when it came to numbers, economy and shit like that but the guy could not change a lightbulb or a plug. He could hardly even tie his shoe laces. If you think only people with low mentality get involved with 'degrading activities' you're sorely mistaken. And if that were the case they'd be innocent, as they would not have the mentality to understand the exact nature of their actions.

I gave you a small analogy, regarding the brutal murderer.

Ok, it's a start.

In the case of Adam, it is because he had the choice he fell, and as such, given the odds, he was foolish.

If you say so.

And as I have mentioned before but was ignored, God acts according to time, place and circumstance. You would have to know about, the culture at that particular time and place, to get some understanding as to why circumcision was important.

But that's just your opinion. God did not say: "Hey i'll change my mind later depending on circumstances and places." He made a specific rule and to this day has not said that rule is null and void. As such you are going against the specific rule of god by not being circumcised. Unless god visited about 2 billion blokes on the planet in a dream and told them they no longer had to? It seems so easy for you guys to make it up as you go along and deny the words of god whenever it suits you. How can any of us be expected to undertake any rule of god when you guys pick and choose whichever you feel is appropriate for you. Just like Adam you're making choices of your own- which may be foolish also.

I will apologise in advance for being overly blunt.....

Apology accepted. If someone did as you stated of course to me it would be evil, but what about to them? Undoubtedly there are people who are evil and do these things for pleasure or whatever but with the majority it's all to do with upbringing, mentality, (as you stated earlier) etc... Can you really fault people who know no better, who know nothing else? On a personal level yes, easily- but on an overall level how can you fault someone who doesn't have understanding of the morality of it? Was it Jesus who said something about forgiveness? Personally there would be no forgiveness, but i guess in line with scripture that's my weakness.

Please, let’s be serious.

I'm always serious.

So you’re car wheels have a mind of there own?

Look at a film like the Terminator: man creates machine which can think for itself, machine kills man. Who's at fault? If my car wheels could think for themselves and choose what they wanted to do then drove me off a cliff who's at fault?

There’s no need to run, the argument put forward by athiests, is silly. Simple as that.
But if you have anything new to offer, to prove that God cannot be omniscient if man has freewill, then please feel free to do so.

Well im not an athiest so the 'silly argument' doesn't refer to me Im not gonna sit and attempt to prove whether god's omniscient or not until it can be proven there is a god at all. However to analyse data of said god is a start and sometimes references to his apparent 'ability' must be taken into consideration.

Is it alright to rape, steel and murder?

My morals differ from some people. Rape in my mind is a definite no-no. However stealing is dependant on circumstance. In the case of Robin Hood, (something along those lines), i would say it's more than ok. As for murder.... If Bob murdered John and Sue, (Johns wife), got her revenge and murdered Bob i'd say that was ok aswell.

The fact that you have 1 choice, means you have freewill. If you don’t like the idea of returning back to you original position, as loving servant of God, then you have to take your chances in the material world.

Ok.

Yes, for Adam, there was no reason to go against God.

There was no reason not to. He had free will and had no understanding of good from evil.

There is no “they”, Adam wasn’t the one tempted by the serpent, he had no affinity with the serpent class. Eve was the one who was convinced, then she convinced Adam, no doubt through her feminine charms, having got to understand them through her previous act.

Through her feminine charms? Listen, she could have flashed her boobs for the next millennium it wouldn't mean anything to Adam who didn't even know what nakedness was at that point in time.

 

[Prisme]

What is sad

I am always fascinated to see the evolution of a thread.

Long letter.

Short answer saying the opposite.

Reply

and then its a long process of quote-n-paste, slowly, ideas are forgotten and nothing really evolves, since every one is so tied up about puny little excerps from each others posts.

Just a remark....

In the spirit of having something to do with this thread:

I believe in God.

 

[SnakeLord]

I've tried in the past to not use quotes but it doesn't work. At least with quotes you can show exactly what you're referring to and if done right can avoid missing any points made by the person beforehand. Furthermore this is a forum. and is a place where people can discuss, debate and argue points from their own perspective- what do you think people do on forums? The main problem of course is bandwidth consumption but you can register to help out- i intend to do so shortly.

You never have to read replies but i think it important when replying that you show what points you are talking about so everyone can keep upto date on whats being said. Undoubtedly topics will divert from the original point, but that's the way of humans.

I wouldn't consider any of it as 'sad'. It's mentally stimulating, can help gain knowledge and spread your own views. It's nice to see what other people think of things- it gives us all a chance to learn and all a chance to teach.

If it was sad, you wouldn't be here and you wouldn't have made your post.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Originally posted by SnakeLord

Well..... because there's a million different religions and we're all in here debating about it. If we all knew and understood this forum wouldn't exist.

There’s one religion, and a million different interpretations, and we’re all here debating the existence of God, which is the object of all major religions.

Mankinds confusion was handed down by god. Let's say im confused over the validity of god, thats not by choice- it was given to me.

Where, in the story of Adam and Eve, did God hand down any confusion?

We do? Everyone has a different understanding- it's nothing to do with intelligence,

I would disagree, intelligence has everything to do with understanding, intelligence means your capacity to understand.

it's to do with interpretation and personal understanding.

Intelligence is still required.

Doesn't mean you understand it at all the way it should be understood. 4 billion+ people might very well disagree with your 'understanding'. I suppose it's down to their lack of intelligence?

They may well disagree, but so what? I cannot judge their intelligence, because I am not privy to their experiences, I have to deal with mine, and those in direct contact, first and foremost.

You sound as if you're claiming that to be true, No sorry- not claiming, insisting.

Before Adam fell from grace, he was perfect as he was directly associating with God, the Supreme Perfect by all accounts of scripture, during that time he did not profess to know the truth, but just acted naturally. On becoming aware of the dualities of the material world, his actions changed, he developed pride and as a result became embarrassed upon realisation that he was naked. This was the second sign of his weak position.

Kindly tell me what intelligence is and what its relation to god is.

Intelligence is the capacity to know or understand, a person of low intelligence will act foolishly because his capacity to understand is low. God is not a physical being, therefore He will never be detected by physical instruments, so we have to develop our intelligence, firstly through understanding ourselves (self-realisation), through reading and hearing from the right sources, that there is a god, who is the highest authority. Developing intelligence to advance bodily activities, is not very intelligent, because the body is under the control of nature, and will die. It makes sense not to put a lot of effort into a rented apartment.

I take it the answer was 'no, i dont have any proof'?

Any proof of what?

As for your last sentence-mentality is not an issue. In fact people who commit atrocities usually are of much higher intelligence than most people.

That is foolishness. They may have enough intelligence to plan a situation, or to create deadly weapons, but that is not good intelligence. They do not have the capacity to realise the results of their actions, other than what they are going to accomplish. A real intelligent person, is aware of the reactions of his actions, and sees no point in harming other living beings just for the purpose of his own gratification. An intelligent person is a friend and well-wisher to all living beings, not an enemy. An intelligent person, need not be able to read or write, know philosophy or science, as these subjects are designed to elevate persons to the status of high intelligence.

Ok, it's a start.

Well?

If you say so.

I don’t say so, it is clearly expressed in the bible, let me show you;

Gen.2.15. "You may freely eat fruit from every tree of the orchard, 2:17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will surely die."

Gen.3.6. ….She also gave some of it to her husband who was with her, and he ate it.

To me, his choice was foolish.

Apology accepted. If someone did as you stated of course to me it would be evil, but what about to them?

They would have committed the act, it was their intent, just for some amusement.

Undoubtedly there are people who are evil and do these things for….

Try and imagine a whole world where that kind of action is normal, and carried out by every single being, then you begin to scratch at the surface of what “all mankind had evil intent” means.

Was it Jesus who said something about forgiveness?

At this level, there is no forgiveness, forgiveness requires intelligence and compassion, When someone is purley evil, there is no question of these attributes.

Look at a film like the Terminator: man creates machine which can think for itself, machine kills man. Who's at fault?

If the machine can think for itself, then the machine is at fault, because it decided to kill.

Well im not an athiest so the 'silly argument' doesn't refer to me

Looking at your posts, I would say you most definitely are an atheist. It doesn’t matter whether you think you are or not, it is how you act or write.

However to analyse data of said god is a start and sometimes references to his apparent 'ability' must be taken into consideration.

What is this “analyse data” thing, read the scripture, and try to understand. The truth is within you, only you know what is going on in your personal situation, and if you believe, God knows also.

Love

Jan Ardena.

 

[Prisme]

Snake lord

Not using quotes is a intellectual effort that requires the author to embody the thoughts of the one he is replying to. Using quotes is an easy way out that more or less address the serious issues of an ideaology and a reduction to 'point form' debates.

Did anybody ever tell you snake that you seem to be the over- argumentative type?

(Just to make sure you get it this time) : No reply required.

Prisme

 

[SnakeLord]

I disagree for many reasons. Intelligence or otherwise doesn't mean everyone has well functioning memory. The very essence of debate is to discuss over points raised. Within a thread topics change and divert from their original paths. In order to keep the reader in line with current standing it helps to show what area of reference you are referring to. If you debate specific points and areas you are debating, if you do as i am now doing you are making a statement. I like debates- i do not like making statements. Most debates include questions which are passed back and forth- i find it healthy to show which areas i refer to. I am not in a position to think you have a good memory, good intellectual ability or otherwise. As for embodying thoughts- you're reading this, so my task is complete. You can disagree with anything i've said here and that is what we call debate.

You told me a reply was not required. If that's the case why did you leave a question?

Did anybody ever tell you snake that you seem to be the over- argumentative type?

It could be rhetorical but considering the fact it's based towards me i deem it imperative that i answer it. As such a reply is required whether you think so or not. The answer is no. I will debate an issue that i disagree with or have opinion on for eternity- that is my gift from god, (to use theist opinion). Debate and questioning is my main function in life. Debate is good for learning and good for teaching. I've had many people say i'm a man who lives to debate and i agree fully, but i rarely resort to plain out arguing. Typing is not quite as good as verbal debate but it is still good fun. When you don't want replies, don't leave personalised questions.

Ok i'm not gonna use quotes now so let's hope nobody gets lost within.

If we were to agree that there's only one religion and a million interpretations that still shows my point. If we understood what was written there would only be 1 interpretation. Everyone has their own truth but in no way does that signify ultimate truth. To ourselves it is but the simple fact we can debate points with everyone else shows it's not a universal truth. We may very well be correct in our belief but then should have the ability to show that truth to everyone else.

We owe our confusion if the bible is a true representation of facts to god/s. Just after the flood god/s cause confusion upon man because they are progressing too quickly. Man is spread across the face of the planet and his language is confused. Just so you know I am using 3 bibles for reference: The NIV, NJV and KJV.

In this instance intelligence is more than the capacity to understand because that understanding is your own personal version. A big part of intelligence is also knowledge. You can understand and know that chopping your foot off will hurt, at this stage you can understand your personal depiction and belief in a god but you don't know that. You'll probably disagree here and say you do know, but that is a personal assumption of knowledge. The belief you have, the things you put faith into may very well be completely different to how you understand them. Intelligence in itself is very personal. One man might have intelligence in the mathematical field while another knows no maths but is a musical genius. Nobody can claim above intelligence when making assumptions and relying on faith alone. They can show intelligence in the way they share their faith and assumptions, they can show intelligence in investigating their faith and assumptions but nobody has superior intelligence when it comes to mere speculations. One of your points would be a good example of showing things from my perspective- however i've said i won't quote to keep prism happy so i wont.

How can you claim Adam as being perfect? Before he ate the apple he wouldn't have any understanding of good or evil. As such if one day he felt like chopping Eves head off he wouldn't be at fault, but would- to our own morals- be far from perfect. Furthermore if he felt like eating an apple that was forbidden he wouldn't be at fault simply because he saw no wrong in doing so.

Evidence goes to show god is, or can be, a physical being whenever he chooses to do so, if not always. Even in the very early days god himself strolled through the garden of eden. Of course undoubtedly we will debate this point and undoubtedly i will hear comment that it's mistranslation or metaphor but i regard that as hiding from the evidence that presents itself clearly and concisely.

NJV: 'The man and his wife heard the sound of Yahweh god walking in the garden in the cool of the day and they hid from yahweh god among the trees of the garden. But yahweh god called to the man; "Where are you?" He asked'

Now i'm pretty sure your first statement will be to say it refers to Adam and Eve walking through the garden. Some problems arise with this i'd like to offer unto your consideration:

'The man and his wife heard the sound of god as they were walking in the garden...' If it were like this i would agree with you, but it isn't. Let's take a quick look at the NIV

'Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the lord god as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day...'

Again this is flawed, it should be:

'Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the lord god as they were walking...'

In every version i have examined there is direct flaw with saying the walking refers to Adam/Eve.

Secondly we must ask why they would hide unless god was physical and walking through the garden. Then we must ask why god would say "Where are you?" unless he was physical and walking through the garden. I regard it as pertinent evidence to suggest physical attributes.

If you have no idea which section i am referring to blame Prisme.

Well i was referring mainly to mass murderers, serious lunatic dictators and people of that nature. It has been show they have a much higher level of intelligence than the average man. It has nothing to do with planning or making weapons. As a brief example i'd mention Gary Gilmore- a man of obvious superior intellect but a lunatic. The same can be said of the majority. You think intelligence is simply "seeing no point in harming other living beings just for the purpose of his own gratification. An intelligent person is a friend and well-wisher to all living beings, not an enemy" I hate to say it but this is one of very few statements on this forum i deem to be complete and utter nonsense. You assign obviously christian bred morality to equaling intelligence when it is far far more than that. Harming others or not comes down to morals, not intelligence.

Well let's assume god sat down and explained the meaning of death and so on vs eternity or whatever else we are led to believe. If he chose he did so for his own reasons. We can sit here and by our own standards label him as foolish but if someone makes a concious decision we must acknowledge it being one of two things: Failure to understand the future implications of said action or wanting to do that which you have chosen. If he chose and had knowledge of the result then it is his choice and as such he is not really foolish. If he didn't have knowledge of the results that would occur he is innocent of any crime until after he'd eaten the fruit and could distinguish otherwise.

People don't commit crimes purely for amusement. Sure, some do- but that's not an answer to the whole issue. If they do so we can say they lack society morals but we can't say they lack intelligence.

I have sat down and imagined a world comprised of pure evil, those going against god and causing havoc etc etc... Firstly i wonder why there was such uprising against god- in fact every single human on the planet aside from Noah and his family had risen up against god and had started to commit acts of extreme evil. If god was indeed what he is assumed to be, destruction of everything on earth would seem to be a rather futile attempt at solving a problem. From a human perspective at any rate. It didn't seem to be an act of sheer anger, where you'd act without concsiously thinking of the outcome he was grieved and pained. His heart was full of sorrow.... He obviously made an error of judgment when thinking he could make and control a species and decided to end his creation. His design errors led to the deaths of all upon the earth, (obviously except noah yada yada).

If you create a machine with the ability to kill and the right to choose to kill, if it then kills you you alone are at fault.

Im not an athiest, or anywhere near being so. I study and search evidence in order to find truth. I do not just accept on faith and i never just deny outright. I have been sitting in this thread with the attitude that god is real and exists- and have been analysing what is written by and about him in order to ascertain answers relating to god and to religion. An athiest wouldn't bother. You then tell me it doesn't matter if i think i am or not but then proceed to state the truth is within me and only i know my personal situation. As such you have no place to tell me what i am.

I'm going to now upset Prisme and quote your last line. If he has a problem with it he can sue me.

What is this “analyse data” thing, read the scripture, and try to understand. The truth is within you, only you know what is going on in your personal situation, and if you believe, God knows also.

I am analysing the written word of the bible. What i understand is, as with everyone else, a personal understanding. The debating follows to point out your understanding to others, to seek, ask questions and find answers. The truth is not within me, it is out there, somewhere in the realms of the universe. Anything that is true within is just a personal truth. I'm not interested in what my heart or head thinks is truth, i'm interested in the real truth and that alone. If i 'believe' there's nothing to say 'god knows also' because there's nothing to say there is a god. That's your personal truth- and you are at right to have it- but why think your personal truth must be everyone elses personal truth? As i said, im not here for personal truths, just real truths.

 

[Prisme]

To Snake

Thanks for confirming my doubts....

P.S.
Nice work on the quotes.
(Who would of thought that snake was also so self-conscious of what others thought?--> no Snake.. its not really a question to be answered.)

Peace

 

[TheVisitor]

How do you know nobody understands it?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well..... because there's a million different religions and we're all in here debating about it. If we all knew and understood this forum wouldn't exist.


===================

This is how your reasoning is flawed - the question was "how do you know nobody understands it.".?
That means even a single person....

But you make the false statement assuming - "if we all knew and understood this forum wouln't exist.
That is false.

Just because there are still people asking questions , doesn't mean there are not some who have found the answers....

This is the flawed reasoning you use on all your responces to deny the truth.

If God wanted everyone to see the truth, they would see it.
The truth is He doesn't.

Because those who receive not a love for the truth, He sends them stong delusion that they should believe a lie and be damned by it.

 

[Allahs_Mathematics]

As snake told me of this incredible phenomena of Ignorance being spread its only Gods duty to come in and put Satan back in his baby seat . Bare whitness to superiority being unfolded through the channels of epistemology , as God will show why He is God(omniscient) and why PRISME is the true DEVIL (unknowing) .


Just because God is bored at the moment He will show the devil why his tricks are worthless in the eyes of God .

Let Me QUOTE :

Snake lord
Not using quotes is a intellectual effort that requires the author to embody the thoughts of the one he is replying to. Using quotes is an easy way out that more or less address the serious issues of an ideaology and a reduction to 'point form' debates.
Did anybody ever tell you snake that you seem to be the over- argumentative type?
(Just to make sure you get it this time) : No reply required.
Prisme

What do we have here , clearly the work of the devil i would say

Firstly the adressing to Snakelord , I do hope the devil does not mind for God to comment and analyze even though it was not adressed to God , because as the devil should know the authority for a post to be commented on does not rely on the person to whom it is adressed . Yes I know you have not said anything like this , I also know that your mind as I have analyzed from only these few sentences is very capable and has plenty potential to create such illogical claims (saying Hey...that was not adressed to you was it ?) , as a direct effect of calling on authority of the adressed of the posted to have upon the answering of it .

Now for QUOTES , the great evil-doer of intellect , why would one conscious person quote ? You show (correctly) that there lies a rather greater intellectual efford not quoting , HOWEVER , why would making this efford be seen intelligent ? Let me tell you why , because your concept of intelligence has little to do with BEING intelligent , but rather ACTING intelligent , that is why u care so much for ones EFFORD , something that is an act , and not a state . No what you are doing is trying to create diffucluties that because you believe an EFFORD defines intelligence . But Devil , how about quoting the entire piece of text , what is up with that , something God just has done , why would he do that ? Would he do that because of your sorry reason of non-efford(easy way out) , and point-form debates ? No , God does so because he is used of dealing with Devils and has learned from experience that there actually might be a chance of development if the Devil re-reads his own words (If he even does care to make the EFFORD to read what he has said , as deep down inside he knows he knows nothing compared to God) . And even if he doesnt admit as he cant because only the devil depends on emotional concepts like pride , he would still improve silently .

But there are many more reasons that make the using of a quote advantageous , like for instance a tool to show precicely thinking structures in a persons thinkingproces so that illogic can be shown quite easily , another reason might be to give a detailed analysys of each concept the person presents .

Ofcourse the devil has no clue on such concepts , for instance :
Did anybody ever tell you snake that you seem to be the over- argumentative type?

Here we see the devil attempt to draw overal authority towards his point of view . Another great emphasis is made when the word "seem" plays role , as the question of anothers authority already shows one trying to distance himself (his opinion) from the opinion stated (as he assumes it to be so that the authorizing others agree with him(ofcourse he also assumed that others obviously must inform this person as a social controll type way to popularize his views) .
But the most wonderfull thin a devil shows with such a sentence , is that he himself does not dare to say I FIND YOU etc , he tries to remain out of shot yet still wishes to make a statement .

But now for the assertion you were making (well assuming actually , the assertion u make is the accusing of Snake to be so) , actually acknowledging something like over-argumentative , and worse , categerize an entire class of over-argumentatives making it a "type" . Is there also a over-true , over-right , over-intelligent , over-etc in your fallascious mind , or have you been trapped into the web of your own silly tricks ?

Hey no offense by calling u devil P , I was just testing my latest theological theory , it passed the test .

Peace

 

[mountainhare]

It is impossible to prove anything to someone who is determined to suppress their mind and intelligence, and who only uses their eyes for acquiring knowledge, and takes the words of bogus authorities.

Bogus authorities, such as the Christian Church. Yeah, I know what ya mean. Sorry, you had that one coming.

How am I supressing intelligence and my mind by wanting evidence before believing in something? What is so 'unintelligent' about that? It is normal for the human mind to doubt and analyze. That's what makes us human!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you told me that the knife O.J Simpson used to murder his wife exists, and is being held by the Mafia, I can't disprove that knife doesn't exist.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Can you prove the knife does exist?

Can you prove God exists. (Thank you Jan, you just fell into a pit.) God is like the O.J Simpson knife. I certainly can't prove it. You have to prove god, which you have not done. You would not believe in my 'knife rumour', why should I believe in your 'god rumour'???

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I doubt you chose.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I was captured and sold into the unga-boonga religion.

I didn't mean it like that! For instance, how many christians are in Iran??? How many Hindu's are in America??? Not many (except refugees maybe)
You cannot deny that Christianity is a dominant religion in western worlds. If you are born in a western country, there is a rather large chance you will be Christian (or catholic, or seventh day adventist, woteva)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All I need is one photo of a pink unicorn, one photo of a gremlin, one reindeer seen flying, and you have proven your point.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So a photo would prove its existence, eh!
Poor you!

So a book (the bible) would prove its existence, eh! Poor you!
And no, the photo would not convince me, but it would also destroy my disbelief. I would be 'sitting on the fence'. I would ask the person who took the photo to then show me the unicorn (or gremlin). Then I would believe.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Can't prove a non-existence claim my dear.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Then don’t make them.

I didn't CLAIM god exists. I am claiming that god is unproven, thus he does not exist in my eyes. Why is that so hard for you to understand? No evidence = no belief!
Let me do that again, maybe you might catch on. Observe, this is one of the main reasons why atheists are, well, atheists...
NO EVIDENCE= NO BELIEF!!!!

There’s no need to run, the argument put forward by athiests, is silly. Simple as that.

If snakelord's argument was silly, you should be able to answer it, and answer it well, thus making him look like an idiot. You haven't done that, so his argument must not have been as silly as you claim. You just can't answer it.

There’s one religion, and a million different interpretations, and we’re all here debating the existence of God, which is the object of all major religions.

Which shows that God is an invention of mankind. Yes, I said mankind. Woman was made from a rib of man. Woman must serve man. Woman befouled man. Woman must give birth to children as punishment. Come on, can't you notice just a tiny bit of sexism here? Woman was created from a rib of man! AHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!! That wouldn't even fly in a Star Trek movie!!!
Well, yeah, I guess almost every religion is related, if you note their treatment of women.

I would disagree, intelligence has everything to do with understanding, intelligence means your capacity to understand.

Oooh, good theory, but I could argue against that. I would say that intelligence is how much you know. But I am not getting into an argument about intelligence. I am not a physcologist. There are MANY types of intelligence (go and do an IQ test). From intelligence with maps and pictures, to reading, memory, general knowledge, numbers, street smarts, etc. But I agree, intelligence is required to understand things. Tell me, how is intelligence required when understanding God? The Bible does all of the thinking for you.

Before Adam fell from grace, he was perfect as he was directly associating with God, the Supreme Perfect by all accounts of scripture, during that time he did not profess to know the truth, but just acted naturally. On becoming aware of the dualities of the material world, his actions changed, he developed pride and as a result became embarrassed upon realisation that he was naked. This was the second sign of his weak position.

Some tribespeople walked around naked, until clothed europeans, spaniards and dutch killed them off. Are you saying that these tribespeople were still 'perfect.'
Also, you have to provide evidence supporting the theory that God 'banished' adam. Did adam write this in a book? Did he know how to make paper? Did he have language? What part did microbes such as bacteria and viruses play? They are never mentioned in the Bible (man didn't know about microbes when the Bible was written. Ahhh, what a coincidence!!! That is evidence for my theory that man wrote and dictated the Bible.)

God is not a physical being, therefore He will never be detected by physical instruments, so we have to develop our intelligence,

HAHAHA. Yeah, right. You are really saying we have to develop our 'faith'. And you have not provided Evidence (hehe, you just hate the E word, don't you) that god exists, physically or supernaturally.

through reading and hearing from the right sources, that there is a god, who is the highest authority.

Which sources are the right sources? The Bible? The Skat? The Koran? The teachings of Buddha? Zeus? Mars?
How do you know it is the right source? Do you have Evidence (ouch), or just blind faith? I think you only have the latter.

Developing intelligence to advance bodily activities, is not very intelligent, because the body is under the control of nature, and will die.

And you are afraid of dying, of encountering nothing? You cannot appreciate life, in otherwords. You must be VERY hard to please, my dear girl.
"Oh, the sunshine, good food, a good education, a shelter are not good enough for me. I need a happy place in the clouds where I can dance naked in the grass beside a shining being."
Maybe Santa Claus will bring you presents for Christmas as well.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Look at a film like the Terminator: man creates machine which can think for itself, machine kills man. Who's at fault?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If the machine can think for itself, then the machine is at fault, because it decided to kill.

The guy who said something about the Terminator was inaccurate. Humans created robots, and give them orders. The robots think for themselves when deciding how to accomplish those orders. I think that was a very poor example.
We were God's experiment. His experiment failed, and he threw a tantrum.
Let's me say one more thing. Is it free will when someone places a revolver at your temple and tells you to sign the contract (hehe, "The Godfather" rules!!!) No, of course it isn't! That is what god is doing with us. He has placed a revolver at our head. Sorry, I don't know why, but I have a feeling that I had to mention free will here.

Snake lord
Not using quotes is a intellectual effort that requires the author to embody the thoughts of the one he is replying to. Using quotes is an easy way out that more or less address the serious issues of an ideaology and a reduction to 'point form' debates.

Did anybody ever tell you snake that you seem to be the over- argumentative type?

Prisme

Prisme, you seem to be the smart-ass type. This is a forum, people argue and post their ideas. I would be extremely worried if someone was not over-argumentative.
We quote things so that people know what is going on.
Obviously you have not passed primary school. When you get to secondary school, and are taking english classes, you will learn that it is beneficial, gets you better marks, and makes your argument stronger, if you use quotes.
And yes, using quotes does require intellictual effort. Knowing what quotes to use to make one's argument more feasible is quite a skill. Explaining why you chose those quotes makes you even more intelligent.
Now, Snake Lord has presented a brilliant argument. And Jan, although I do not agree with her, has also presented a rather good argument. Neither is perfect. The only thing that does not require intelligence is when you do not agree with someone's idea, and bitch about "You're using quotes, boo hoo"
If you have nothing good to say, butt out.

 

[Zero Mass]

Originally posted by mountainhare
NO EVIDENCE= NO BELIEF!!!!

Sounds good to me. When I was a child I was able to believe without any evidence because I did not think for myself. Now that I do all my own thinking, I have to say that it doesn't make any sense to believe in our modern world. There is no reason to believe in something that does not exist.

Originally posted by mountainhare
I would be extremely worried if someone was not over-argumentative.
We quote things so that people know what is going on.

Yes, quotes are a good thing, like saying the word "crap" or typing it on this forum.
I have one thing to say about quotes, please people, try to paraphrase the nutter you are quoting, you don't need to use the person's entire post. Use an elipsis or two, shorten that shit up a little.

And a note about posting, it makes it a lot easier to read your arguements if you divide them up into paragraphs. I good rule to follow, every main point you have should have it's own paragraph, this makes a post easier to read and is therefore more interesting and attractive.

ZERO MASS

 

[Jan Ardena]

Part 1 of 2....

Originally posted by SnakeLord

If we were to agree that there's only one religion and a million interpretations that still shows my point.

No, it would show that everybody has a mind of their own, and choose to use it in the way they see fit.

We owe our confusion if the bible is a true representation of facts to god/s. Just after the flood god/s cause confusion upon man because they are progressing too quickly.

No, God causes confusion on stupid, foolish men who think they can get into heaven, by building a pile of bricks. This may be progression to you, but it smacks of stupidity to me.

In this instance intelligence is more than the capacity to understand because that understanding is your own personal version.

Every understanding is ones own personal version, you cannot understand unless you……………….well!……..understand.

A big part of intelligence is also knowledge. You can understand and know that chopping your foot off will hurt, at this stage you can understand your personal depiction and belief in a god but you don't know that.

If you understand something, then you have knowledge. If you have knowledge of something, you don’t necessarily understand it, thus, understanding is the key. What I understand about God, is what I know, which is hardly anything, but enough to know He is real.

Intelligence in itself is very personal.

So is ones understanding and knowledge, it stands to reason. You will only believe me, (if you do not understand me) if you think I am credible. If you think I am credible, then agreement is already in your heart to some degree or other. Where intelligence comes in, is who we choose as credible.

One man might have intelligence in the mathematical field while another knows no maths but is a musical genius. Nobody can claim above intelligence when making assumptions and relying on faith alone.

Nobody should, in their right mind, claim above intelligence under any circumstances, unless they understand everything that is below them.

They can show intelligence in the way they share their faith and assumptions, they can show intelligence in investigating their faith and assumptions but nobody has superior intelligence when it comes to mere speculations.

Quite right, that’s why I believe in God, because He has superior intelligence to every other living being, and there is no question of speculation.

How can you claim Adam as being perfect?

Because God is perfect, and as he obeyed the word of the Perfect, he could only be perfect.

Before he ate the apple he wouldn't have any understanding of good or evil.

He must have had, or God would not have told him that if he eats of a certain tree…..

Gen. 2:15. The Lord God took the man and placed him in the orchard in Eden to care for and maintain it. 2:16 Then the Lord God commanded the man, "You may freely eat fruit from every tree of the orchard, 2:17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will surely die."

Your analysing is not going too well, is it?

Evidence goes to show god is, or can be, a physical being whenever he chooses to do so, if not always.

Okay, let’s assume God was walking in the garden. Why would He be physical?

..mass murderers, serious lunatic dictators and people of that nature. It has been show they have a much higher level of intelligence than the average man.

I would describe them as cunning, smart, clever, manipulative, fearful, careful, brainy, deceptive and probably a whole host of other things, but I would not class them as intelligent. But we are all entitled to our opinions.

You assign obviously christian bred morality to equaling intelligence when it is far far more than that. Harming others or not comes down to morals, not intelligence. /quote]
So, a society which has no morals, can be deemed an intelligent society?

If he chose and had knowledge of the result then it is his choice and as such he is not really foolish. If he didn't have knowledge of the results that would occur he is innocent of any crime until after he'd eaten the fruit and could distinguish otherwise.

So what are you trying to say?

People don't commit crimes purely for amusement. Sure, some do- but that's not an answer to the whole issue. If they do so we can say they lack society morals but we can't say they lack intelligence.

We are not talking about “crimes”, we are talking about “evil intent”.

Firstly i wonder why there was such uprising against god- in fact every single human on the planet aside from Noah and his family had risen up against god and had started to commit acts of extreme evil.

Well, I searched and searched, and could not find anything that mentioned an uprising against God.
Gen,

6:11 The earth was ruined in the sight of God; the earth was filled with violence.
6:12 God saw the earth, and indeed it was ruined, for all living creatures on the earth were sinful.

Maybe you ought to get a different bible.

If you create a machine with the ability to kill and the right to choose to kill, if it then kills you you alone are at fault.

If the machine had the “right” to “choose” to kill, then surly it is the fault of the machine, (assuming this mad hypothesis could be true). A “right” would mean the machine had either a legal or a social claim, to do or to exact the act for which he/it has a right. If, however, the law stated that it is the owner who accepts responsibility, then the machine would have no rights. But this is a silly argument really, isn’t it?

Gotta go, I’ll post part 2 later.
This is fun!

Love

Jan Ardena.

 

[Prisme]

Allah's Math

You not only seem to hold a grudge against people who have
opposed you.. but also people who have never talked to you. This is interesting.

I don't mind being called the devil, however I do prefer reading things that don't ressemble Hegels 'small logic' and try to have an overall objective other than attempting to lose everyone's comprehension. (offence intented, since you seem to dig this overt and direct approach.)

In addition, I consider the essay form more of an intellectual efforT (yes a T), since it requires... more intellectual effort. All your babbling of what I supposedly consider intelligence to be is a terrific waste of kilobytes. What I said was specific and limited in its field of application. I never generalized it to the point of debating what intelligence was or should be.

Of course, some will now attempt to offer a more structured essay form, however many will fail, for they clearly have no writting skills. This does not mean that what they say is false, only that they should work their skills more. Overall, I am pleased to see improvement.

So to snake and allah's math,
I just think its funny that people are so readily touched in their ego when, all of a sudden, a guy like me comes in, without ever giving out any names or accusing directly any individual about 'quote abuse'; that suddenly many over-argumentative types come crashing in (essay style) about how quotes are important and that I somehow have issues with the devil and don't know the real meanning of intelligence...

Whatever guys, if you can't accept a general comment about a general fact without feeling deeply concerned, maybe you should relax on the forums a little and find less volatile hobbies.

Prisme

P.S.
Mountainhare: I am 4th year university, which you are clearly not... so yes, I am the smart-ass type, does this make you the dumb-ass type?

 

[Jan Ardena]

part 2

Im not an athiest, or anywhere near being so. I study and search evidence in order to find truth.

Have you been successful in finding truth?
Do you think you could give some examples, if that’s not asking too much. Thanks.

An athiest wouldn't bother.

An atheist would bother to give the impression that God is a murderer, so I ask, where is the difference?

You then tell me it doesn't matter if i think i am or not but then proceed to state the truth is within me and only i know my personal situation. As such you have no place to tell me what i am.

Your argument shows that you have not been as thorough as you would probably have liked or thought you were, in fact, your arguments, where the Personality of God are concerned, are silly, to be honest. And it is clear (and yes it is my opinion) that you have some problem with God, more than not believing in Him, much like most of the atheist posters in sci-forums, and as such refuse to see common-sense. Common sense dictates, that the truth is within you, for you to analyse something and then come to a conclusion, that conclusion comes from within, you have to make the final decision.

Love

Jan Ardena.