------------------
They have cats in the future?

[This message has been edited by Cyrino (edited September 12, 2000).]

------------------
UT 0wnz j00 all!

But the lasting popularity of religions like this just goes to show that some people need to believe. It is a big cult. But that in itself is not a bad thing if they keep it to themselves and don't try to be our moral police force or otherwise mess with nonbelievers. It'd be nice if people of different religions could tolerate each other (ie, shut up about who's right, morally and otherwise) and stop using their faiths to collectively shoot themselves in the foot. There are more important things for us to argue about!

People only believe what they want to believe...

jews do not suck. and niether do most christians or muslims or whatever. thats the stupidest thing i have ever seen. its a person to person basis, yes, maybe some christians suck, or some jews suck, or some muslims suck, but to make a blanket statement like that is just wrong. sides, werent you the one who didnt want people making blanket statements about drug users??

I rekon it takes guts to be a Jesus follower, knowing they is going to hasseld for the rest of thier lives.

Some of my best mates are Christians and I'm seriously considering becoming one.

no matter what god(s) they pray to, or practices they follow, the zealots pretty much suck. i've got friends who are of lots of different religions, and everything's cool with them. i don't much care what people choose to believe, as long as they're not shoving it onto others.

------------------
kuru
'if your children ever found out how lame you are, they'd kill you in your sleep.' -frank zappa

quote:

---

Originally posted by damien_s_lucifer:
Christianity is a crock. Most religions are. They are there to try and keep people under CONTROL.

CHRISTIANS SUCK!
JEWS SUCK!
MUSLIMS SUCK!

Hindus & Buddhists are kinda cool, though. They don't have all this Big Bad God Will Kick Your ASS bullshit.

---

If I were you, I'd rephrase that to say,

Christianity Sucks!
Judaism Sucks!
Muslimism Sucks!

That way, you are correctly directing the remark at the religion itself (the deserving party) and not at the people who may or may not be zealots about their faith. I know plenty of Christians and Jews who are perfectly content to believe what they believe in their own home and not force it on anyone or be condescending towards anyone who does not agree with their beliefs.

But to say that all Christians or Jews or Muslims suck shows gross ignorance and biggotry on your part. And you think they are biggoted? As a wise man once said, remove the plank from your own eye before you attempt to remove the speck of dust from another's eye.

And no, I do not consider myself a "Christian," or a "Jew," or a "Muslim." I consider myself a human, and believe what I want to.

If you have a problem with that, you can go fuck yourself, or your mama, whichever you prefer.

Christians may seem annoying to many of us at the moment due to the fact that some of their unswerving stance on certain issues such as drugs, sex and fun in general. Christianity takes its strength from its numbers and the somewhat bigoted views it generates within its members when misinterpreted.
Principles such as peace and nature have never really been as popular or exciting as "My god will rain down fire upon thy heathen ass!"

Many ex-drug users turned to a "god" when they kicked the habit. many people who are in a rut or poor or cant find their way in life all turn to religion. Why?

It gives people a foundation. Some ground to stand on. Unfortunately some people just don't have the self-esteem within them to stand on their own - they need help in their lives. "God" gives it too them.

I find it ironic that many of the people (I dare not start a flame war by insinuating that "many of you") turn to drugs to help their self-esteem gain some ground - and don't think about all of the evils drugs have arisen in Man. That these same people will defend their drugs and their "goodness" to the bitter end - and insult and swear at people who do not agree with drug use...starting to sound familiar?
<see the drugs/badd thread>
Well, drug users could then be considered a religion. They believe in something that is illogical. Some use drugs to make friends occasionally - to build community. And now it sounds like I could just replace "god" with "drugs".

And now Im just bored.

[This message has been edited by iso9k (edited September 13, 2000).]

I *used* to be a southern baptist, but now I really don't practice/worship anything. I really got sick of worrying "Omg.. I just *thought* about sex.. am I going to hell?" or "I wonder if God is really up there... o damn... lemme hide from the lightning"

Personally, now that I have done some reading, and talked to lots of other people, religion in general *sucks*. No, not ALL religions are bad or "suck", but the majority do.

I think each individual should follow what he/she believe in his/her heart to be true, and not what some "dictator" says one should believe. If you believe in the devil and that he(or she.. you never know) is your master, then more power to you. But the minute you come to me and tell me "you must worship the dark prince, or you will be tormented in heaven for eternity" (yes, that was supposed to be humorous) will get a quick jackslap across the face

Anyhow, I reckon I should do a bit of work, since I haven't really done any yet

O yeah, and Rhydant: UT *DOES* own j00 all!

------------------
Trying to figure out what to do with my new domain : < www.rabid-wolf.com >

Of course we have to realize that churches do help people turn their lives around for the better as well, and they do help out the community, and those in need. But, so do charities.

CHRISTIANS SUCK!
JEWS SUCK!
MUSLIMS SUCK!

Hindus & Buddhists are kinda cool, though. They don't have all this Big Bad God Will Kick Your ASS bullshit.

quote:

---

Originally posted by damien_s_lucifer:
Christianity is a crock. Most religions are. They are there to try and keep people under CONTROL.

CHRISTIANS SUCK!
JEWS SUCK!
MUSLIMS SUCK!

Hindus & Buddhists are kinda cool, though. They don't have all this Big Bad God Will Kick Your ASS bullshit.

---

I'd say that anything in which people follow without question sucks. Esp if its encouraged...

------------------
It's not peer pressure, its just your turn

quote:

---

Originally posted by damien_s_lucifer:
I correct my statement to read: Christianity sucks! Islam sucks! I'll live Judaism out of it, because Sithee is correct. I'd hesitate to call Jews a "race," but they are indeed a culture.

---

I cannot beleive my eyes.

What the fuck is going on here?! Talk about exclusionary politics! Talk about seperatism! Talk about a load of crap!

Rod Carew is a black man who decided to become Jewish, as did Sammy Davis Jr. and Whoopi Goldberg. Are they part of the Jewish race? No. Isrealites, unlike the aforementioned examples, are an ethnic culture of a EuroAsian race. I don't mean to flame you, Damien...But for the love of God, let's not make exceptions to vindictive statements just because we've offended someone. If you think the notion of religion is bullshit, then come out and say all are bullshit. Don't cop out because someone involved in the conversation believe's their ancestor's religion defines who they are. My ancestors went to seminaries, became priests, and held Christianity as their identity. But I'm not going to sit here and ask you to withhold your opinion because I feel a kinship to Jesus. The same goes for Muslims. The majority of Muslims are African/Arabic...but there 300 million Chinese citizens are also Muslim. And someone else brought up a very intelligent point - it's the religion, not the followers, that should be criticized in the first place.

The point is:
Maybe centuries ago, religions and race went hand in hand. But we've evolved since then. Let's remember that and try not to be so seperatist and "holier than thou" in nature.

[This message has been edited by whiskey@throttle (edited September 13, 2000).]

OK, but the people who were against drugs were the ones calling the drug-usesrs names.

Wow, Im glad to see a lot of people actually care about this subject. I was beginning to think the whole USA was being 'born-again".

I was once a 'born-again' Christian. I guess now that makes me a 'dead-again-secular', or mabey just a Liberal.

The biggest issue concerning me with all of this religious nonsense is not that people practice religion persay, but that everyday I see a little more Christianiy in our politics. This is what scares me.

Politicians dare not addmit their atheism.
I for one would much rather have a Presidential candidate who practices the 'sepparation of church and state'.

The seperation of chuch and state is very improtant to me.

edit: if you look up "jew" in the merriam-webster dictionary, youll find that the definition of being of jewish heritage comes BEFORE being of jewish faith. so there.

[This message has been edited by Sithiee (edited September 13, 2000).]

iso9k said, "That these same people will defend their drugs and their "goodness" to the bitter end - and insult and swear at people who do not agree with drug use...starting to sound familiar?
<see the drugs/badd thread>"

OK, but the people who were against drugs were the ones calling the drug-usesrs names.

------
exactly...you just proved a point! Look at all of the people that bash members of religious communities. And those communities bash back.

[This message has been edited by iso9k (edited September 13, 2000).]

Does religion help 'man' or 'men'?

Man-kind needs not help from religion. It seems like more than religion helping 'man-kind' religion puts barriers up. Between neighbors, between Country's, somtimes between families.

Many religious people loosing faith often turn to drugs for help. I did. Drugs gave me what God never did: Self-confidence, friends, a good time, passion for the Universe, and love for the whole world.

Christians preech about acceptance and love. A FEW Christian MEN and WOMEN I know practice this. But as a whole, Iv'e seen friends, communites, families broken up because of words in the Bible.

This is OUTRAGEOUS!

No one has any right to claim that their religion makes them better and more enlightened than anyone else, that's just bullshit. Religions that teach followers to believe that should be wiped from the face of the earth: they promote hate and intolerance and bigotry, all of which are completely unfounded and artificial constructs that should have never found a place in any society.

As for there being a higher power or not, I prefer to leave that up to each person to decide whether or not they believe it or not. I personally believe that there is a God, but I would not ask any of you to believe or disbelieve anything because of my beliefs.

I hate the way that most modern religions have utterly twisted the principles on which they were founded. For instance, you cannot find biblical backing for many of the tenets held by different Christian denominations. And many of the greatest of Christ's teachings have been lost through the ages, replaced by rituals and distain for people who do not hold to "doctrine" (although the fact that this doctrine is a bunch of bullshit created by "religious leaders" is conveniently left out).

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hellraiser:
No one has any right to claim that their religion makes them better and more enlightened than anyone else

---

I hate to break this to you, but people *DO* have the right to claim that their religion, drug use, or WHATEVER THEY WANT makes them better and more enlightened.

It's called "Freedom of Speech." You might want to look into it.

And while I'm on this topic, ATHEISTS AND AGNOSTICS *ARE* MORE ENLIGHTENED THAN ANYONE
ELSE!!!

GOD IS BULLSHIT!!!

Stop and think for a second. You are being quite reactionary. You rational is in the toilet. Without a good and new reaction to the evils of the religious institution, your words will fall upon deaf ears. Your statements are nothing but rhetoric.

You are caught up on the bad side...fine. there are bad things. Easy target. Nothing to gain in an attack. illogical to make such an attack.

I doubt you sit and think about the good things the belief in God brings people. You should sometime. You might learn a bit about yourself.

As a side note: I dont believe in god or Jesus. I dont follow a religion, unless Cisco IOS is a religion. I dislike what the religious power has done in many cases. But I cant think of ANY institution that has done no wrong.

quote:

---

Originally posted by iso9k:
Without a good and new reaction to the evils of the religious institution, your words will fall upon deaf ears. Your statements are nothing but rhetoric.

---

This isn't exactly new, but consider this:

PEOPLE USE "GOD" AND THE BIBLE AS AN EXCUSE FOR IGNORANCE AND INTOLERANCE. If we need intolerance in this world (and we do... if only to be intolerant of intolerance) we could at least give REAL reasons instead of saying "God doesn't like it."

PEOPLE USE "GOD" AS AN EXCUSE TO NOT GIVE OTHERS CREDIT FOR ANYTHING. Do something well, and "God is working through you." Do something poorly, and you've turned your back on God. It's like the only way you can do something ON YOUR OWN is to fuck up!!!

PEOPLE USE "GOD" TO WHITEWASH THE HORRORS OF THIS WORLD. Do you really think the Holocaust was the "will of God," or "God working in mysterious ways?" Come on. Don't tell me a benevolent GOD willed that. Don't tell me that Satan had something to do with it, because God can easily kick Satan's ass. HITLER willed it and a bunch of ignorant asses followed him.

There's more, but I'm getting mad just thinking about this shit.

WHEN ALL PEOPLE REALIZE GOD IS DEAD, WE WILL BE FREE AT LAST.

Er, OK dude. I would not have started this topic if I was THAT close minded. I was actually hoping to see more religious people in this debate. Not to tear them a new asshole, but to hear their side of the story.

And yes, I am seeing the BAD right now, because that is what this topic is based on.

And I also know my arguments aren't new. Im not trying to come up with anything new. Just what I see.

quote:

---

Originally posted by damien_s_lucifer:

WHEN ALL PEOPLE REALIZE GOD IS DEAD, WE WILL BE FREE AT LAST.

---

God is nothing more than an energy force which controls how everything in this universe works. God is not sentient, got is not a he or a she, god does not make descisions or tell us what to do or what not to do. Simply a creating force, nothing more.

If there is a god in the traditional sense of the word, would any open minded person agree with me that we're nothing more than toys that he enjoys fucking with and ruling over? When you have the power to do all, why create life with the ability to make it's own descisions, when you force rules upon them so they can't think for themselves anymore.

As far as I know, every major religion is founded on the principle of "beleive what we say or you suffer eternal damnation." Fear based on blind faith...is any bigger manipulator of human action conceivable?

Speaking of manipulation, what about Mormonism and Christian Science? Joseph Smith, the founder of the Mormon Church, was a documented con man who sold "miracle elixers" and other phoney swindles before making his pilgramage to Utah. Similarly, L. Ron Hubbard admitted that he invented Christian Science as a ploy to increase his sci-fi book sales (btw, he wrote Battlefield Earth, if that gives anyone a better picture).

Kinda makes you wonder how Moses, Jesus, Mohammed, etc. really were.
----
Sithiee, I see the point you are trying to make and I respect your opinion. However, I'm not sure I understand it. You said you're an atheist Jew. To me, that sounds like someone saying they are a "non-Mormon Mormon," just because their great-great grandparents settled with Joseph Smith. To the extent of my anthropological knowlegde, unless you have a hereditary linkage to Abraham/Moses/the Isrealites, then you are not a Jew. Of course, if you have converted, that is an exception to the rule (which is why a brought up Whoopi as an example). Sure, Billy Crystal shares many physical features with Mel Brooks, but neither look anything like Rod Carew. Know what I'm saying? I just don't know why Judaism should be sanctified and treated "holier than" other religions, as was done in an earlier post.

[This message has been edited by whiskey@throttle (edited September 14, 2000).]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sithiee:
assfucker, jews do not suck. watch your fucking mouth. saying a jew sucks simply because they are jewish is like saying a black guy sucks simply because he is black. unlike christianity, jewish people dont have like 500 different kinds of judaism. jews are a race, not just a religion. im an athiest jew, and id really apreciate it if you wouldnt go around insulting things you dont know about. besides, its not like jews ever went around taking out people simply because their religion was different...they killed people cause they wanted into the holy land, but thats different.

jews do not suck. and niether do most christians or muslims or whatever. thats the stupidest thing i have ever seen. its a person to person basis, yes, maybe some christians suck, or some jews suck, or some muslims suck, but to make a blanket statement like that is just wrong. sides, werent you the one who didnt want people making blanket statements about drug users??

---

nice job

------------------
kuru
'if your children ever found out how lame you are, they'd kill you in your sleep.' -frank zappa

Christianity sucks!
Islam sucks!

I'll live Judaism out of it, because Sithee is correct. I'd hesitate to call Jews a "race," but they are indeed a culture.

Still, any belief system that claims that someone bigger than us is watching over us... is complete and utter bullshit.

It's just us.

The thing is that questions like these are impossible to attain a solid, logical philosophy about, because the questions potentially goes deeper than our universe..

A man who thinks about these questions for himself will spend a great deal of time doing just that and likely never reach any conclusion. It is good, therefore, to have a range of "off the peg" systems of belief, otherwise we'd all spend great amounts of time having to think out our own and getting nowhere.. Choosing a ready made religion prevents you having to think about what to believe.

Like instead of saying "God is dead" say
"I think God is dead".

Cause not all people share the same veiw as you. I for one belive God is real, by personal experience etc....

Note I did not blatently state "God is real" even though I happen to belive it.

I'm reall tolerant in these kind of discussions, but had to bite my tongue with previous mentions of Jews etc, but I have a LOT of mormon friends who you just labeled as con artists.
Back off and get your facts straight.

I'll admit, when I first heard of them, I thought big black hats and lots of wives. I know of few people in this world more tolerant or good than those.
I spent a few years over there in Utah (the snow IS some of the best in the world after all) at the invite of some friends who moved there from South Africa. I was helped to set up at University, given a chance I never would have had in SA. Having moved there from SA, I had seen the most extreme area in the world at the time as regards to bigotry and intolerance.
Your statements smack of it.
You need to get some facts right. There are about 10 million mormons. Argue with them that what they believe is due to a Con-man's teaching. That 'con-man' was murdered by fellow americans whilst volunteering to stand trial after being offered protection by the governor of Missouri. His brother was also murdered at the same time. Name one con-man willing to face his accusers. He NEVER got to Utah.
His followers then, facing an EXTERMINATION order from the same governor, (and you yanks say Hitler was bad) moved westward, settled in an area no-one in their right mind would want, and in doing so opened the west of America to settlers.
The reason for this was, after being DRIVEN out of Illinois by mobs, they were initially given some swampland in Missouri. they then proceeded to turn this into a city (Nauvoo). The converts coming from Europe flowed in their thousands and this threatened the residents of Missouri who suddenly realised the Mormons could outvote them, this distressed them, particularly the Governor.
Smith was even preparing to run for the US presidency in order to help protect the mormons from illegal and unconstitutional persecution.
Americans should look at their own history before proceeding to bomb the shit out of other nations that are copying what they did.

The people there might be hicks to a large extent, but they are also some of the kindest, humblest, patriotic and hard working people you have ever met. Crime and drugs are low. (comparitive to rest of US).
Industry is high tech (Novell and others)
Education is fantastic. They have extemely high standards that the rest of the world wishes we could return to and yet they get labeled constantly as prudes and narrow minded.

As for manipulation, no-one can force anything. Young men go out and VOLUNTEER 2 years as missionaries, which they finance by themselves or from their families.
The members pay 1/10th of their wage as 'tithing' - once again, voluntarily.
They have no ministers like other churches. That really surprised me. All their leaders go without a salary. Yet this church is one of the top ten corporations in America.
Now go ahead and tell me that someone like Steven Covey ('Seven Habits' author) is manipulative or a con-man. If anyone ever made a reader feel good or empowered it was him.

Please be responsible when you post something like this. This is so typical of the ignorance and bigotry played upon by Hitler when he was rising to power. Don't be a victim like the German people were.

This could be a thread all on its own. Hope you don't get too upset at how I reacted, but you just dissed the very beliefs of some of my best friends. Beliefs that make those same friends into people that I would give my life for were they to be threatened with harm.
Once again, please read up on something BEFORE you express an opinion about it.

it's been this way since the beginning of time, and it is now. first lemme state that i am a religiously inert person. i have no religious beliefs and i don't even concern myself with whether or not there is/are god(s).

however, i do believe that if there is/are god(s), then it is not god(s) who use man to accomplish some sort of greater ends. i think it's quite the other way around. men use god (by men, i mean humans)to justify their deeds. after all, what action could be more just than one that is willed by god. but i don't think that's how it happens.

the romans educated people in the name of god, the egyptians built a great empire in the name of their gods, the greeks invented democracy in the name of the gods. the spanish commited the inqusition in the name of god, the english went on the crusades in the name of god, and the white man decimated the native population of north america in the name of god.

hence my belief that people use "god" and not the other way around.

also, religion. religion is quite different from god. this is where my ideas start getting controversial. i tend to believe that religion is the ultimate tool of control. the goal of most religions, at least most that i've read about, has been to keep the members of that religion in fear of a being they can't see, hear or talk to. then the religion sets up 'spiritual leaders' who are supposedly the ones who can talk directly to the head entity in charge.

convince anyone of this, and you own their every move.. it's more binding than any set of leg irons. so, that's my problem with religion.

i don't have a problem with religious people, as long as they don't try to push their beliefs onto me, and they think for themselves.

*kuru deposits $.02

------------------
kuru
'if your children ever found out how lame you are, they'd kill you in your sleep.' -frank zappa

I really don't think there is much I can add to that, only a "I agree".

These thoughts were not worth Ũ.02

------------------
Trying to figure out what to do with my new domain : < www.rabid-wolf.com >
Lead (only) developer of Data-Admin: < http://dadmin.sourceforge.net >

I understand your point now. Makes sense.

edited: BTW, I hope I didn't come off as being malicious or condescending...looking back I can see how it may have seemed that way.
Peace,
wt

[This message has been edited by whiskey@throttle (edited September 14, 2000).]

but still. As a general rule, Christians bug the shit out of me.

kixzor2, this is not a "debate" forum. This is a forum for RANTS :

RANT 1 : to talk in a noisy, excited, or declamatory manner
2 : to scold vehemently
transitive senses : to utter in a bombastic declamatory fashion

if that doesn't work, i remind them that they're trespassing on private property and they have exactly 5 seconds to leave before i release the dog. (i don't actually have dogs, but i've found that a really BIG dog bowl in their sight line with a name like 'fangs' or 'killer' written on it gets the job done)

at any rate, they get one chance at being politely told that i am not intersted in their dogmas. if that fails, all bets are off.

------------------
kuru
'if your children ever found out how lame you are, they'd kill you in your sleep.' -frank zappa

"You're trespassing, and i can beat the living fuck out of you while you are here uninvited...5...4...3..."

if that doesnt send em running, i dont know what would.

they said "um, that's okay, thanks for your time" and ran away with their tail between their legs

"Hi there! Have you ever thought about the fact that God is a bunch of nonsensical crap that is pushed on you so that others can control your actions? I'd like to speak with you a little more on this topic. May I come in?"

1) Universe - A demension(a large empty space where stuff can fit), atoms, electrons, chemical reactions, radiation, gravity, quantim physics, electricity...etc and all the rules that (largley unexplained) hold the universe together..

2) Life - Think about how complex the human body is. All the different systems working together - the ability to reproduce by joining half your genitic material with another. Think of how complex an INSECT is, or even a single cell (I cannot believe that life evolved on it's own. And I don't understand how others can, unless they simply DO NOT want to believe that there must be a higher power)

3) A Solar system , perfectly balanced, with a planet that just happens to be the right distance form the sun, breathable air, tons of water, with a balanced ecosystem (except for man) and PLANTS that just happened to evolve along side animals at the same time to provide energy(food). Ever notice that all the planets in the solar system are aligned too? (same plane, that is, except I think pluto??)

Based on personal observations like this I think (well I feel that I KNOW) that there must be some kind of God(s). I'm not saying I know what (s)he wants from us. Hell, there could be a race of Gods and the one that create our universe is just a being from a superior race having some fun.

Who knows, maybe some of the religions have it right? I suppose if God did care, he'd make sure that HIS religion was practiced on earth or there wouldn't be much point BUT no matter how I look at it I can only see God as some being having some fun with us. We're here for his entertainment and nothing more. I think that fits any religion pretty much.

We're just a big game of SIM UNIVERSE.

You guys should have some fun with that

[This message has been edited by Happyfish (edited September 14, 2000).]

I just wish he'd use the 'Gold' cheat.

1) the universe is fucking huge. just considering the odds of a planet that can bear life being made, id guess it wasnt all that unlikely that it happened. plus, i think rather than a planet that was perfectly suited to our needs being made, i think our needs just adapted to the planet...

2) all life on earth (or so i believe) evolved from single celled amino acids. this explains how stuff works so well. the cells would mutate, and if they survived, it was a good mutation, and it helped them survive in the environment, if it was a bad one, they prolly wouldnt be able to survive. its kinda like overclocking. you make a change in the original specs, and boot it up, see if it worked. if it did, then youre set, and you can try OCing it more. if it didnt work, ya gotta start all over, and not try that again, cause it obviously didnt work.

well anyway, thats why i disagree with you...

Eg: Some super intelligent being that understands the laws of physics and nature well enough to have them subject to him/her/it decides that the little puddle planet with all those bipeds is now at a stage suitable for guidance and uplifting to a higher conscious state.
Possibly tinkering or 'helping' on a genetic level.
Teachings are given and promoted to certain of their numbers or even the same teachings to different groups. Those early groups with their limited understanding can only regard this control of natural phenomena as godlike.

The being/s, quite aware of early man's inability to comprehend these thinds until he attains a certain level of technology and morality, decides to go easy on the explanations and illustrates them in almost childlike terms. Hence creationism, multi armed gods, strange cults, and strange rites not all of which fall under the 'chrisitian' umbrella.

Not many christian churches are willing to take a public stand and declare their belief that there is only one such earth. In fact, many actually admit or even believe that their God created many such earths on which to 'test' mankind.

Quite an odd branch of discussion isn't it and it leaves open so many options....

(que the X-files theme music)

[This message has been edited by Willy Pete (edited September 15, 2000).]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sithiee:
Happyfish - two things, which IMO make your reasons for there being a god not true...

1) the universe is fucking huge. just considering the odds of a planet that can bear life being made, id guess it wasnt all that unlikely that it happened. plus, i think rather than a planet that was perfectly suited to our needs being made, i think our needs just adapted to the planet...

2) all life on earth (or so i believe) evolved from single celled amino acids. this explains how stuff works so well. the cells would mutate, and if they survived, it was a good mutation, and it helped them survive in the environment, if it was a bad one, they prolly wouldnt be able to survive. its kinda like overclocking. you make a change in the original specs, and boot it up, see if it worked. if it did, then youre set, and you can try OCing it more. if it didnt work, ya gotta start all over, and not try that again, cause it obviously didnt work.

well anyway, thats why i disagree with you...

---

Ah, but does the computer overclock itself? or does it need a human or other being to turn it on, install software, set up the bios, and even build it in the first place?

something chemically reacted with something else, which chemically reacted with another thing and eventually it became recognizable under the current defnition as "alive." maybe it was one cell, maybe it was a prion or a virus.. things kept bumping around, chemically reacting, mutating, and growing.

it probably took a while for dna to come outa that big soup of chemical reactions, but once it did, the mutuations from then on were small. the dna strands that humans have are about .0000001\% different from all other life on earth that's ever been. a tiny change in the dna causes a huge change in the life form. so basically, if we go with the big bang and say that earth is 4.2 billion years old, and humans have been around for 35k, the dna had 4199965000 years to mutate and evolve before that.

since prions are basically strings of amino acid that aren't complete dna, they probably were the beginnings of dna... a bunch of them would combine together under the right chemical conditions. a couple times, it worked, and there was dna.

as for where all these mutations came from, at this point there probably wasn't much atmosphere around earth, so there's all kinda electromagnetic radiation bombarding the planet, gases escaping from it, wicked stuff that simple organisms could mutate and adapt to. like when plants started spewing oxygen into the oceans... oxygen's a metabolic gas, it's poison. sure, not to us, because a few hundred million years ago, animal life adapted to actually use oxygen to survive. there have to be millions of instances of mutation, adaptation, and evolution that we can't even think of now.

anyways, that's my theory and i'm stickin to it. maybe like everyone else, i just wanna believe what i wanna believe.... but i like the idea of a big chemical accident happening in primordial soup and turning into what's here today.

------------------
kuru
'if your children ever found out how lame you are, they'd kill you in your sleep.' -frank zappa

[This message has been edited by kuru (edited September 15, 2000).]

i prefer the scientific "evolution" over the religious claims that we were made by god and that god sees/makes everything.

science changes everyday, as we grow and change to adapt

religion stays the same "hard headed" we were right the first time view, fear god or goto hell!

but on the other hand:
i do belive there is something out there that watches over as many as it can at one time (i was in a bad car wreck where everyone in the car should have died, we all walked away with some bumps and bruises) who knows why? why were we picked to live instead of some little child getting shot in a gang shoot out? i'm glad i lived and so did everyone else in the car but why us? i'm not a godly person, i didn't pray to him the night before.

sounds kinda like a hypocrite dosen't it?

point is it's up to you to decide. if you like satan, that doesn't mean your a bad person (unless you do bad things)/if you like god that doesn't mean your a good person(i live in the "bible belt" so i know a lot of god people, most of them goto church to help their reputation and they are really shitty ppl and their daughters are whores and their sons are some of the biggest drug users i know)

damn, i'm scatter opinionated, and i can't spell wortha shit!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sithiee:
Happyfish - two things, which IMO make your reasons for there being a god not true...

1) the universe is fucking huge. just considering the odds of a planet that can bear life being made, id guess it wasnt all that unlikely that it happened. plus, i think rather than a planet that was perfectly suited to our needs being made, i think our needs just adapted to the planet...

2) all life on earth (or so i believe) evolved from single celled amino acids. this explains how stuff works so well. the cells would mutate, and if they survived, it was a good mutation, and it helped them survive in the environment, if it was a bad one, they prolly wouldnt be able to survive. its kinda like overclocking. you make a change in the original specs, and boot it up, see if it worked. if it did, then youre set, and you can try OCing it more. if it didnt work, ya gotta start all over, and not try that again, cause it obviously didnt work.

well anyway, thats why i disagree with you...

---

Sounds pretty simple. Well it isn't.
Actaully you probably got a better chance of your computer slowly evolving (through o/c and short circuits)than for an amino acid.
Many evolutionists believe that earth isthe only planet to have life because the chances of life successfully evolving form nothing is practicly ZERO.

But this should be in a different thread.
I was just trying to say why I believe in God. I think my reasons were valid.

quote:

---

Originally posted by kuru:
maybe like everyone else, i just wanna believe what i wanna believe.... but i like the idea of a big chemical accident happening in primordial soup and turning into what's here today.

---

Sounds like you really don't care that much, but did you ever THINK about it? It seems you believe that because it's convenient for you.

Well here I go...

I am a self decribed Einsteinian-Heisenbergian. I find rationality with both Einstein's "God does not play dice" quote, and with Heisenberg's Uncertainty principle. These are supposed to be opposite, but think about it this way. Atoms behave in a predictable way. We can verify these predictions because atoms are big enough to measure with photons (see) and not change too much. From what I have read, I propose that subatomic particles would behave in a predictable way. From this, you can say "If I knew the exact position and momentum off all subatomic particles in the universe, I could predict the future." But, because if their small size, we cannot measure these, and therefore we must use probabilities to guess. We don't KNOW how many neutrons are currently flying around in a fission reactor, but we can get a good estimate.

That was a little confusing, so I'll sum it up. Everything will happen only one way, because that's the way the subatomic particles will react. But, we can never know what this one way is. God may not play dice, but we have to in order to "see" the smallest levels of the universe.

basically what i'm saying is that maybe earth is the only place where carbon based dna encoded life forms exist.... but that doesn't mean that there's no other way for life to exist. we've never seen it, so we can't possibly begin to imagine the odds that somewhere in the universe there is "life" based on nothing like what exists here. the odds that the same KIND of life that exists on earth exists elsewhere in this universe is pretty much nil. the odds that something completely different exists? we can't begin to guess at that, because we have no way of knowing what different things there could even be.

maybe some solar system a billion light years from here has life that's based francium. maybe the replicant code for that life form is what we know as a crystal. maybe it's something we can't even imagine because we've never seen it before.

try to picture something that there are no words to describe. we can't. our imagination, while incredibly vast, is also incredibly limited. the "odds" that we calculate are really our best guesses at quantifying things that we can't even begin to imagine might exist.

i saw a movie once where "god" was really a college student, with a lot of other college students in some class where they each had to make a universe.. each universe had a 'creator' but because there were fifty or so students in the class, there were fifty or so universes... the whole thing just gets mind boggling.

what i came up with a whole pile of years later is that the thing that made the most sense to me was "frame of reference." it's a concept of physics that basically means that as long as you are inside a system, you can't fully understand it. there'll always be things about this universe that we can't understand, can't quantify, and can't figure out because we exist inside of it. maybe if we figure out how to get outside of it one day, we'll be able to fully understand everything about it and where it all came from...

bottom line, if you're inside the box, you can't think outside the box.

oh yeah, i never did find 'the truth'

------------------
kuru
'if your children ever found out how lame you are, they'd kill you in your sleep.' -frank zappa

quote:

---

Originally posted by Willy Pete:
Hold your horses Whisky!I have a LOT of mormon friends who you just labeled as con artists.Back off and get your facts straight.

---

No to sound like a dick, but my facts are straight. Joseph Smith was a documented false-elixer salesmen. There are factual records from his time to support this claim. Furthermore, I was not attacking Mormons. I was just questioning Smith's credibility in order to highlight a point about religious leaders (mainly, why do we label people like David Koresh as cultist fanatics yet sanctify people like Jesus).

Perhaps I chose my words wrong. I have Mormon friends in the tabernacle choir, but I don't agree with their beliefs. I do not attack them for their religion, however.

...and one more thing: you spent a large amount of your post highlighting the glories and accolades of Utah. Let me say that due to the time I spent there, I feel Utah is, bar none, most oppressive state in my entire union . Why, you ask? For one, beer and liquor are barely allowed. Apparently the legislature thinks they have the right to overrule the 9th amendment to MY constitution and reinstate partial prohibition. It is an arrestable offense to possess a keg! (unless you are a bar owner) The liquor stores must close at 7! You can't buy real beer (only 3.2 beer) except for state run and state taxed liquor stores (where the cashier is a law enforcement officer and a six pack is ฟ). Speaking of which, I found the police more unfriendly than the friggin' LAPD. See the movie SLC Punk for more ideas. It paints a nice picture.

PS - Just know that I am not trying to bash Mormons, only those in political power in Utah...whatever religion they may be.

[This message has been edited by whiskey@throttle (edited September 15, 2000).]

The answer is quite simple: yes, Christians are crazy. We would have to be crazy to believe that faith and prayer alone can heal physical or mental illness. We would have to be crazy to believe that water can be turned into wine or that a few loaves of bread could feed a multitude. And we would have to be crazy to proclaim that the Son of God walked among us, died to atone for our sins, and then rose again from the dead. With the understanding of the world that modern science gives us, we would have to be crazy to believe that any of this is possible.

But consider this: the cold, mathematical certainty of science defines a sort of clockwork world, where everything is explained, everything is in its place, everything has its purpose. But that world is not the world we live in. Look around you - this world is full of pain, guilt, and loneliness that science has done nothing to fix. If everything fits in perfectly to some perfectly predictable and scientific scheme, why do so many of us feel out of place and without purpose? The world is crazy, too - you can agree with this whether or not you believe in God.

So yes, we Christians are crazy. We are crazy to believe in a loving and benevolent God in a world where love is all too rare and where misfortune often strikes the most undeserving. But if it is a choice between the insanity of this world that we live in, which is ultimately destructive, or the insanity of believing despite all this that the world has a purpose and our lives have a meaning, why not choose the delusion which does not deny life but affirms it?

And take a second to imagine, no matter what you believe, what it would mean if it's true, if there really is a God who lived among us and died to save us, and who can give you a purpose and a direction for life. If that is true, if there's even a chance, isn't it worth risking being labelled "crazy"? The clinical definition of insanity is a disconnectedness with reality; by this definition, and considering all the evil in this world which many would want to distance themselves from, is it really so bad to be "crazy"?

As far as life evolving... well, the second law of thermodynamics says that without the application of energy, things tend to move from a more ordered state to a less ordered state. But if you think about it, the reverse also seems to be true : with the application of energy, things tend to move from a less ordered state to a more ordered state. So any planet with reasonable conditions and a lot of time is going to evolve SOME form of ordered system. Earth happened to evolve carbon-based energy containment systems that we call life.

I went on a nature walk with my bio. class a few years back. The instructor made an interesting point : a forest is a more complex and ordered system than a plain, a swamp is a more complex and ordered system than a lake, etc. And there is more energy contained in a more ordered system than in a less ordered system.

quote:

---

You wrote:
take a second to imagine, no matter what you believe..if there really is a God who lived among us and died to save us...if that is true, if there's even a chance, isn't it worth risking being labelled "crazy"?

---

So, in essence, you are saying: "why not be a Christian? It can't hurt if you're wrong, and will only help if you're right." Which leaves me to ask you:
1) How do you know Christianity is the "true" religion, and not others that contradict the gospel of Jesus?
2) Would you carry your philosophy over to include, "why not beleive in the tooth fairy? It can't hurt if you're wrong, and who cares if you're thought as crazy!"

quote:

---

Originally posted by whiskey@throttle:
So, in essence, you are saying: "why not be a Christian? It can't hurt if you're wrong, and will only help if you're right." Which leaves me to ask you:
1) How do you know Christianity is the "true" religion, and not others that contradict the gospel of Jesus?
2) Would you carry your philosophy over to include, "why not beleive in the tooth fairy? It can't hurt if you're wrong, and who cares if you're thought as crazy!"

---

Good point, and thanks for calling me out on that. I should probably recant that last paragraph; after all, believing something "just in case" or just because it's convenient is definately a form of "fake" religion, which I would in no means try to endorse. That is, in fact, one major problem that I have with Christianity in this country: it has become a sort of religion of convenience, a set of beliefs that people claim to hold just because that is what is accepted.

Your point about deciding which religion to believe in is a difficult one. I personally have friends who are Catholic, Protestant, Unitarian, Jewish, and several other forms of religions. Therefore I fell uncomfortable stating for certain that my particular religion is right because in doing so I am essentially saying that I believe the majority of my friends have it all wrong.

I would say that what you believe in, what God you worship and how you worship is secondary to how you live your life. I know plenty of good and honest people who are atheists, for instance, and I cannot think that if Christianity is indeed the "right" religion, I would "go to heaven" and they would not simply because of what I believe.

The Hindu religion teaches that there are multiple paths to salvation: the paths of Work, Love, Knowledge, and Meditation. Each person is free to decide which of these paths they will follow. Similarly, I believe that it would be arrogant to state that one particular religion is _the_ path to take; different people will follow different routes, but I believe that the goal is the same. For me, that path is Christianity. If you can follow a different path and yet still lead a life which is fulfilling for yourself and helps those around you, I cannot say that the path you took is wrong.

[This message has been edited by Michael (edited September 15, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by Michael (edited September 15, 2000).]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michael:
If you can follow a different path and yet still lead a life which is fulfilling for yourself and helps those around you, I cannot say that the path you took is wrong.

---

"there's more than one way to do it" is the motto of Perl... does that mean you're a Perlitan?

Im taking 30mg of Paxil everyday. Have been for about a year now. This is hard evidence against your claiming science isn't doing anything to help.

Since science lent me a hand (by boosting my brains serotonin levels) my life has been SO much easier. I don't worry about half the crap I used to.

If God helps you with that, your stoked.

quote:

---

michael said:

But consider this: the cold, mathematical certainty of science defines a sort of clockwork world, where everything is explained, everything is in its place, everything has its purpose.

---

not even science and mathematics can explain everything. this kind of relates to my earlier statement that as long as we're inside the system, we can't fully understand it. mathematics, probably the most nearly perfect science we have an understanding of, doesn't cover everything. even the equations and theorems that we know often don't have answers that are realizable. sometimes, they come out to be some imagiary number, or a division by zero, a null set. and then there's chaos. the branch of mathematics dealing with chaos and fractals seems to be damn near all equations with no solutions. at least, none we understand in this universe.

and even if math could explain or predict everything, there's no reason to think that humans would be able to comprehend those equations.

as far as believing in christianity because there's no harm in it if you're wrong, that was the argument blaise pascal put forth with "the wager." his philosophy was that if you believed and were right, you got a reward, if you believed and were wrong, you lost nothing, if you didn't believe and were right, you lost nothing, and if you didn't believe and were wrong, you lost everything. his methodology encouraged people to 'fake it till they make it' and go through the motions of belief until they really believe.

maybe it works for some, but it seems like brainwashing yourself to me.

------------------
kuru
'if your children ever found out how lame you are, they'd kill you in your sleep.' -frank zappa

Smith may have sold 'elixirs' or something like that, I have no proof against it, my friends that told me about it over there probably may have been selective in their info or uninformed of that themselves. But you did have some inaccuracies that I know of, particularly the note that he went to Utah when he died in Missouri.
But that's all water under the bridge and we've learnt from one another.
The govt system there is totally authoritarian and anal - no argument, but you can't equate the govt with a religion either. The religion and its people may have determined the way in which that govt is implemented, but the two are very seperate. True religion isn't meant to originate from man in the way that laws and govt do.

Back to the original thought of the thread, I think you'd have to be a little crazy to believe that your afterlife depended on how closely you followed the teachings of a guy who died 2000 yrs ago, who, according to badly translated and subjective documents rose from the aftermath of a horrific death.
You'd also be have to be quite nuts to find rational thought among all the strains and flavours of said religion in order to find 'the right one for you'.
You'd have to be more crazy when you found that all or most of these churches were centered on a creed whereby men decided the nature of the christian god and ended up with something similar to quantum physics by stating that he's "everywhere, but nowhere."

I guess anyone clinging to such beliefs would have to be crazy, some more than others, but you have to be a little crazy to survive in this world. That same craziness is found everywhere: in beleiefs in the capitalist system, belief in the righteousness of democracy in its many forms, belief that someone gets to live at the expense of the taxpayer for 10-20 years after sexually assaulting and brutally murdering children. You'd have to be crazy to hope that same judicial system that believes that would be prepared to protect your 'god-given' rights.

I'm scaring myself now. Set Cynical_mode=0.

On a side note and speaking of crazy. I got to work yestarday and had a friend tell me that my tshirt was inside out. Duh, I only travel for an hour on the tube. I guess ignorance was bliss in that case.

dsmoov: your point is well taken that science has indeed improved the lives of many. However, for every person using the products of modern science to improve their lives, there are no doubt several getting high on the same drugs or similar ones. In my opinion, it all sort of balances out. Humans have developed technologies which allow us to do more and more, but we haven't gotten any smarter about how we use those technologies. I like to think of it as a sort of a "bigger hammer" phenomenon: technology is a tool which just gets more and more powerful, but all it does in the end is multiply the effects of whatever good or evil we would have done anyways.

Here's a question: how many inventions / scientific discoveries / technologies can you think of that have been purely beneficial for humankind?

But this isn't really a philosophical forum, it's a rant forum about religion. So here's my personal rant: I have issues about anyone who claims to have a certain set of beliefs, but follows them only as far as they are convenient and easy.

For instance: for years I have been what would best be classified as a "theoretical idealist." Meaning: I cared about the world, wanted to make a difference, wanted to help people and make the world a better place. But in reality, doing this sort of thing takes a lot of effort, especially for an introvert like myself. So I simply imagined how I could help people, once I got the nerve, and never really did anything. I'm trying to change that, now, but it's not easy.

Or again: recently I have become much more involved in my Church youth group, going to all the meetings, reading the Bible from cover to cover, learning all the songs, always ready to help out. Why? Because there was a rather attractive girl in my youth group who I was trying to impress. Another behavior of mine that I'm trying to change.

So that's my rant. I don't care about what you say you believe; if you don't act on your beliefs, you're nothing more than a hypocrite. I don't see the world as divided between Christians and non-Christians, or even between religious and non-religious people, but between those who have some beliefs and try to act on them to help those around them, and those who are content to just sit back and pretend that they're doing something to help.

dsmoov: your point is well taken that science has indeed improved the lives of many. However, for every person using the products of modern science to improve their lives, there are no doubt several getting high on the same drugs or similar ones. In my opinion, it all sort of balances out.

Whats the difference really?

I AM sort of getting high on these drugs are'nt I? I most indeed feel a bit of a rush about a half an hour after taking my Pax.

Or.

Are you claiming that science may lead to (in few cases) recreational drug use?
Are you also claiming that recreational drug use is BAD? (see the rant 'Why do people hate drugs? They rule!!!)

And IMHO there are NOT several people getting high off of Paxil (or similar drugs)for every ONE person perscribed it!

IMHO RECREATIONAL DRUG USE (NOT ABUSE) IS NOT BAD. WHY WHY WHY WHY DO PEOPLE INSIST IT IS A BAD THING!?

[This message has been edited by dsmoov (edited September 15, 2000).]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Willy Pete:
But you did have some inaccuracies that I know of, But that's all water under the bridge and we've learnt from one another.

---

Very well said, Willy. I think that is the main point of all of this - learning through ranting everyone's side and accepting differences/agreeing to disagree. Honestly, your side to the rant shed some light for me and cleared up some inaccuracies. Thanks.

An increase in human knowledge does not necessariy correspond to an increase in human wisdom. If you look at history, we haven't really gotten any better over the millenia. Which, to get back to the topic of this forum, is one reason why Christianity is more than just "the teachings of a guy who died 2000 yrs ago" as Willy Pete called it a few posts back. We haven't changed that much over those 2000 years; the problems with society then and the truths of that time are ones that we still have to deal with today.

in the past 2000 years, we have broken so many scientific barriers, i mean geez, 2000 years ago we had like 3 continents, now weve fucking explored the moon!!! horrible diseases have been wiped out, and the general standards of living have increases dramatically. poverty now is nothing compared to poverty then. we have improved in countless ways, even physically, we are better off than 2000 years ago, as well as mentally, there are less boundaries on the way people can think.

if you truly believe we havent improved at all over the past 2000 years, then you truly need to get out and see the fuckin world.

Is that a quote from Contact? (the movie)
C'mon man.

It's dangerous to assume Religion is going to lead to a perfect world.
And thats pretty much part of what religion is based on.

Check this out, people sometimes die or get killed for their religious belifes. And Im not talking about a bunch of murdering-pagan-aethiests, Im talkin religious countrys fighting other religious countrys over religion!
That is happening as we speek in more parts of the world than I even know of.

People are geting sued over technology copywrites. Very different.

IMHO religious wars are the fundimental factor of this whole rant.

Technology IS improving life on Earth.
Religion is closing minds, and making people think stuff like, "technology isn't getting us anywhere."
BULLSHIT NOW IM REALLY MAD SO IM GONNA SHUT UP.

quote:

---

Originally posted by dsmoov:
Check this out, people sometimes die or get killed for their religious belifes. And Im not talking about a bunch of murdering-pagan-aethiests, Im talkin religious countrys fighting other religious countrys over religion!

---

More to the point, science does nothing to tell you how to live your life or to try to improve the lives of those less fortunate than you. religion, at the very least, attempts to do this.

quote:

---

Originally posted by kuru:
human beings have been around for about 35k years....

The DNA strands that humans have are about .0000001\% different from all other life on earth that's ever been. A tiny change in the DNA causes a huge change in the life form. So basically, if we go with the big bang and say that earth is 4.2 billion years old, and humans have been around for 35k, the DNA had 4199965000 years to mutate and evolve before that.

---

I'm not quite sure where you got your mathematics figures there, but according to what I have read and seen on Discovery Science channel, not to mention what I was taught in school, those figures need to be revised. Humans have been around for a lot longer than 35000 years, the species homo sapiens is believed to be between 1 and 2 million years old. Human DNA while composed of the same elements as any other animal, differs a great deal more than one ten millionth of 1\%, the figure there should be closer to 2 or 3 percent difference between human and simian DNA, simian species being closest to our own DNA. And also, there was probably a couple of billion years after the earth was formed before the primordial soup and the first DNA according to the evolutionary model.

Scientifically speaking, the biggest hurdle would be the first living organism, the jump from organized molecules to a living organism composed of multiple molecules is far greater than any since then if we are to believe the predictions of the evolutionary theory. What has happened since then, from the first on celled organisms to the modern day humans and reptiles and birds and plants and bacteria is just a series of little jumps in comparison. No one knows for sure what mechanism could induce that first jump, or indeed all the jumps since then, mutations while partially explaining things do not cut the mustard. Essentially, a whole lot of things would have to fall in place perfectly for it to happen, and while it makes for a neat scientific theory, and the only explanation without "God" that we have available to us today, the fact is that things rarely if ever go perfectly, and some of the pieces are still missing.

But back to the subject at hand: Christians are no more crazy for believing what their parents and ministers taught them than you or I are for believing what we have been taught in school as fact. The scientific model for the origin of the universe and the evolution of life requires a great deal of faith, much as it requires a great deal of faith to believe that there is a God who created the universe and plans our way of life.

Also, there is nothing at all saying that both could not be true. Suppose we accept the scientific model in all its glory, and say "From the big bang and the laws of nature that subsequently formed, have evolved beings with enough curiosity to question their origin." We could just as easily say, "God created the universe through a mystical event we like to call the great bang, and allowed it to follow the set of rules he caused to develop, so that there would be curious beings to question their origin." This does not in any way contradict any scientific theory, and anyone who tells you it does is full of shit. Science does not claim that God exists. It does not claim that God does not exist. It merely is an attempt of man to understand the natural world around him by ordered study. The question of whether or not God exists is better left to theologians to ponder, and people to determine on their own right.

Remember, you are free to believe what you want to believe, and that means that the Christians are free to believe what they want to believe too. However, I do think it's nice for them to believe it in their own homes, rather than come knocking at my door and saying, "You need to be saved!" But by the same token, I don't think we should have atheists going around knocking on people's doors saying, "God does not exist!" Or scientists claiming that they have scientific reason to believe that God does not exist. By definition, God would be outside the laws of nature that he "created" and as such, there is conveniently no way to prove or disprove his existence. Perhaps he wanted it that way. :P

In the end, one thing can be said without a doubt: we are here, questioning our origins, and trying to understand the world around us. I doubt that this basic questioning state of man has changed since he first walked the earth.

------------------
Just your generic meaningless signature. Mix with 2 quarts water and stir till evenly coated.

Technology is something we use to better our lives. Thats the point of it. To make things easier for us. And not ONLY humans. My Hi-Fi at home is entertaining my pet Parot. She likes the music on when nobody is home...

also, while technology may not attempt to help those in need, it has helped people help people. the christian childrens association (is that the name? i cant remember) do you think they could possibly help so many people on pennies a day without our friend technology?? no. they need it to advertise to the people, to send the food, to figure out who needs help, to figure out the cheapest way to help the most people, and so forth. so if you look at it in that way, technology does help people help people.

now, dont get me wrong, im not like in love with technology, but give credit where credit is due. i dont want to try and give religion credit, because along with the good credit, id end up giving far more bad credit, so you dont want me to do that...

I'm sure there's more examples..

If what you're trying to say is that people who use no technology are seldom happy, I would have to disagree with that. Some of the happiest and friendliest people that I know are the ones with the least need for technology. And you might want to use the term "Luddite," which specifically refers to someone who avoids technology, rather than stereotyping Amish culture.

I am far from being anti-technology. All my summer jobs have been computer-oriented. Robotics. Computer vision / image processing. Web design. I'm also a C++ programmer, plus a bit of JavaScript and yes, even some Perl, at least in the form of CGI scripts. And ever since I started college, I have been checking email dozens of times every day.

I have taken the argument against technology and, because I seem to have little support, I have had to take an extreme view in order to balance out the rest of you. But that doesn't mean that you've convinced me of the inherent "goodness" of technology.

Yes, science has made life better, for some of us, for the time being. But I would stress that nothing comes without a price. Have you seen the figures on oil consumtion, population growth, air polution, the ozone layer, available ground water, and all the rest? It is quite fine to urge me to take the "long view" of 2000 years rather than 100, but in terms of the future, our culture as it exists will not survive even half of that 100 years, let alone 2000. You can say "We've always been able to avoid threats like this in the past. We'll survive this one too." But never before have humans had so much power that, in the course of mere decades, we can change the environment on a global scale.

All use of technology comes with a payoff. The time that I spend on this computer could be spent in some low-tech activity such as socializing or meeting new people. It could be spent getting exercise or at least doing something outside. So in a very real sense, my use of technology is doing harm to me, as well as good.

I believe that technology and science have the potential to do a lot of good. But they also have the potential to do great harm. And often, the consequences of what we do are impossible to see until it is too late.

[This message has been edited by Michael (edited September 15, 2000).]

i don't remember the exact numbers on the differences in dna between species, but it's small. human beings have only 23 pairs of chromosomes, so if we share even 97\% of our dna with every other life form that ever existed, then 44.62 out of every 46 chromosomes we have are the same as every other life form. basically, the point is all dna based life contains a high amount of common information.

michael: in response to: "Here's a question: how many inventions / scientific discoveries/ technologies can you think of that have been purely beneficial for humankind?

none. alfred nobel invented the nobel peace prize out of his guilt over inventing dynamite and seeing it used to kill people. EVERY tool can be used for good and for evil. that includes religion.

pablo picasso summed it up best when he said: 'you never see anything very great which is not, at the same time, horrible in some respect. the genius of einstein leads to the tragedy of hiroshima'

------------------
kuru
'if your children ever found out how lame you are, they'd kill you in your sleep.' -frank zappa

Anyways, I would agree with you that religion is no exception to this rule. In fact, religion is in ways far more destructive than any technology, because it effects, not the world around us, but our thoughts, opinions, and values. And because every religious institution is run by human beings, it would be incredibly naive to assume that all religion is good and right. I've stood among thousands of other religious people brought together by their faith, and listened to people speak about how religion has changed their lives, and I have also shouldered my way through those crowds and left when I found that I could not agree with what the speaker was saying.

Granted, no religious organization is perfect, and no human being is either. But the idea behind religion is to strive for that perfection, whether or not it is attainable.

As for the idea of technology, perhaps it would be best to start a new forum rather than clutering up this one. The same could easily go for you guys involved in that evolution debate.

i think life really could evolve on any planet, be it really cold, really hot, or like here...i think its really just a matter of adapting to the surroundings, unless maybe it was a planet made completely of one element....like if it was a planet of pure titanium or something....but thats not too likely...

second, i think you all think far too much. i mean granted, i think about things, but stuff thats relative to me, like when i stop to think about stuff, i think about driving, or hot girls or maybe who id like to fight (see fight club?) anyway, i never think about whether theres a god or not, cause frankly, i just dont give a rats ass. i dont really think there is one, and if i thought about it a long time, i doubt i would. i admit though, i do use explicatives like "jesus christ" and "god dammit" and when people say "i thought you didnt believe in jesus" i point out how dumb that is, and how thats like not believing in plato or somethin. i say god dammit because its like a multiplier for saying dammit, and i dont have to explain it. imagine how dumb i would sound saying "jesus dammit"?? anyway, thats my 4 cents (im rich today, so i thought id give 4 cents.)

The reason why - Pluto isnt a planet, it was an orbital moon of Neptune til it was hit by a large asteroid, knocking it off course into it's elliptical orbit that is non-planar with the rest of our solar systems' planeterial orbits.

That's the only statement I'd like to make (and yes it is factual - though I dont have any references to point you to except for maybe astrophysics) in this thread, I'm not going to be dragged into the rest of the topical train of 'beliefs'.

------------------
When darkness calls and the pain and suffering begin again, you can guarantee that I shall be the instigator.
-
Kevin "Kayy" Beadle, The Proprietor and Innovator of Kayyos-Vx WebDesigns.

quote:

---

Originally posted by kuru:
hellraiser, i got my number of 35000 years as the length of time that human beings have existed. there were, 1 or 2 million years ago, hominids where were human-like, but modern man as we know it did not appear until much later.

i don't remember the exact numbers on the differences in dna between species, but it's small. human beings have only 23 pairs of chromosomes, so if we share even 97\% of our dna with every other life form that ever existed, then 44.62 out of every 46 chromosomes we have are the same as every other life form. basically, the point is all dna based life contains a high amount of common information.

michael: in response to: "Here's a question: how many inventions / scientific discoveries/ technologies can you think of that have been purely beneficial for humankind?

none. alfred nobel invented the nobel peace prize out of his guilt over inventing dynamite and seeing it used to kill people. EVERY tool can be used for good and for evil. that includes religion.

pablo picasso summed it up best when he said: 'you never see anything very great which is not, at the same time, horrible in some respect. the genius of einstein leads to the tragedy of hiroshima'

---

Modern man as we know him has probably been around about a million years. Perhaps the figure you were looking for was 350,000 instead of 35,000, that would be more reasonable.

Sisters and brothers of rave, I remind you of what we greet and intend to harbour: plur.

Call it what you will, but my beliefs give me what I want, which is all that religion (or lack thereof) should be for anyone.

------------------
Eryn: she 0wns my ass.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Happyfish:
About this whole technology thing. It has made a lot of peoples lives better. But it has made a lot of peoples lives worse: Guns, bombs, missles, nuclear weapons, efficient methods of mass genocide etc..

I'm sure there's more examples..

---

But it has also provided us with medicine, nearly doubled life expectancy for the average person in just 100 years, vaccines, a knowledge of others culture, acceptance, worldwide news, weather prediction, transportation, flight, space exploration etc etc.

Because of human nature, technology will always have a dividing line between good and evil.

Besides, Guns, Bombs and missiles are just modern forms of swords, crossbows and catapults. And those are modern forms of rocks, slings and spears. So while these arn't nessicarily good things, they're not really new things either.

------------------
When my flying days are over, and my death has come to pass
I hope they bury me upside down, so the whole damn world can kiss my ass

the use of one can be either, depending upon who weilds it.

------------------
kuru
'if your children ever found out how lame you are, they'd kill you in your sleep.' -frank zappa

as far as i could tell from web searches, there were hominid and homo erectus for about 2 million years, but what i was going for was homo sapiens sapiens. my number was off, i stand corrected. homo sapiens sapiens have been around for 200,000 years.

some information on these fossil records can be found at: < http://www.onelife.com/evolve/manev.html >

------------------
kuru
'if your children ever found out how lame you are, they'd kill you in your sleep.' -frank zappa

quote:

---

Originally posted by kuru:
a tool is neither good nor evil.

the use of one can be either, depending upon who weilds it.

---

No truer words have ever been spoken.

As for the thing about the age of homo sapiens, I stand corrected as well. I had thought it was a larger figure than 200,000 years, but I guess I was wrong.

today it occurred to me that i don't really care if christians (or any other religious people) are crazy or not.

no worries until they try to push it on me.

then i get a little irritated.

------------------
kuru
'if your children ever found out how lame you are, they'd kill you in your sleep.' -frank zappa

quote:

---

If you look at history, we haven't really gotten any better over the millenia.

---

Actually, we have made significant improvements in the last century or two. We've made strides towards equality for men and women; witnessed the abolishment of slavery and seen a reduction in racism; developed an infrastructure that makes widespread education possible for the rich and poor alike; the list goes on and on. Of significance is the fact that all of these changes can be traced to the humanist thinkers (e.g. Locke, Paine, Franklin, etc), with humanism being inherently areligious.

The problem I see with religions is that they discourage, and often punish, free inquiry. Constructed on a foundation of irrationality, they do not permit questioning and are resistant to change. Furthermore, they encourage tribalism of the ugliest sort. In my view, the combination of all of these things makes religion a recipe for disaster (especially in a shrinking world where we must all get along).

I'm convinced that if all of the world's religions were eliminated tomorrow, the world would be a much nicer place. But it seems that a lot of people need reassurance that they're not going to die, so I guess religion's here to stay.

quote:

---

Originally posted by A * £er:
But it seems that a lot of people need reassurance that they're not going to die, so I guess religion's here to stay.

---

Why does everyone assume that the whole point of religion is to make people less afraid of death? The Christians thet I know don't go around telling everyone "We're going to heaven and you're not." Religion isn't for the dead, it's for the living. We Christians truly believe that God is guiding our lives in order to achieve some purpose in the world. Sure, we believe in heaven, but if you think that going to heaven and living forever is what the whole crucifixion story is about, you really missed the point.

ok where was i going with this? oh yeah, um, learning from the bible vs being a christian. i learned from the bible. the difference between me and a christian is that i don't belive in this 'magic thing' called god or that all the stories were true. so then i guess what i'm saying here is that it's not the lessons learned outa the bible that make someone a christian, it's all the other stuff. like believing you're gonna go to heaven if you behave yourself, and that you hafta toss money in that big brass bowl.

does anyone ever wonder why it is, when nuns priests etc take a vow of poverty, that the roman catholic church is the world's richest organization?

what are they doing with all that money?

------------------
kuru
'if your children ever found out how lame you are, they'd kill you in your sleep.' -frank zappa

quote:

---

Originally posted by kuru:
what are they doing with all that money?

---

I'm not Catholic, so I don't really know what all that money is being used for, but I would assume that since money is the root of all evil, they are holding onto it in order to preserve the rest of the world from that evil. They are clearly doing this in selfless service to the rest of the world, with only the power of their faith protecting them from the evil of that filthy money which they are condemned to handle in such large quantities.

As for the Bible, not all Christians believe that everything in the Bible is true in the literal sense. In fact, you could only believe that through some enourmous feat of self-deception. For instance, some Christians have managed to conveniently fail to notice that there are two versions of the creation story in Genesis. In the first one the world comes from an endless, watery abyss; in the other the world starts as a dry desert. In one mankind is created last, both male and female simultaneously. In the other story, Adam is the first living thing to be created. As for the New Testament, the Gospels don't even agree on when Jesus began his ministry or when he died.

However, a story can be "true" even if historical facts or common sense tell us that it can't be true in the literal sense. For instance, the creation stories, despite the fact that they are myths, have had an enourmous imact because, unlike most mythologies, they are optimistic, portraying mankind as good and noble stewards of the Earth, made in God's image and sharing his creative power.

I know some Christians who would disagree strongly with me on this, but biblical stories such as the creation story were never meant to be taken literally. If they were, why would two opposite accounts of creation appear back-to-back in the Bible?

------------------

quote:

---

Originally posted by darksol:
how many people have actually defended christianity?

---

Just me. But I had a fun time doing it...

What's your take on all this?

anyway, micheal, you dont actually believe that shit about them keeping the money to prevent evil do you? (youll note i have research on this one) the catholic church spends a lot of its money, thats why they have their nice churches and cathedrals an clothes and such. they really love money. look at the birth of lutheranism (i think this guy was about as close as you can get to having jewish heritage without actually being so) he condemned the church because instead of following the bible, and making people repent for their sins, they accepted bribes or "payments" for forgiveness. well, being the cool guy that he was, luther said "fuck no, bitch" and he posted his stuff on the church door. naturally, what it doesnt understand/like the church said luther was evil, and he basically lived the rest of his life in exile. the point is, the church would rather take a bribe than make people follow the bible. the church loves money.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sithiee:
anyway, micheal, you dont actually believe that shit about them keeping the money to prevent evil do you?

---

I was being sarcastic. I should probably learn to use the smileys on this bulletin board to avoid ambiguity, but I didn't think that anyone would believe I meant a statement like that seriously.

Oh, and I should add, you don't have to educate me about Luther; I'm going to a Lutheran church right now, and I also spent the first half of my life in one. And speaking of the Catholic church making people pay for forgiveness, the Catholic church has started granting "indulgences," as this practice is called, once again. A friend of mine bought one as a joke while he was in Rome.

[This message has been edited by Michael (edited September 18, 2000).]

------------------

------------------

As for any correlation between computers and atheists, in my experience there is little connection. After all, there's nothing in the Bible that is against computers (although I'm sure some people could interpret it that way...) I know plenty of compter programmers, web designers, etc. who are Christian.

My beliefs are very personal to me, and I would never dream of forcing them on someone else, so pray don't try to force your beliefs on me, whether atheistic or Buddhist, or Hindu, or Christian, or Jewish, or Muslim, or whatever you hold dear.

Although to be truthful, my beliefs are probably more Christian in the biblical sense of the word than the beliefs of many of the Christians I have come in contact with over the years. The simple way in which the first century Christians believed is far more compelling to me than the ritualistic, disassociated, denominational, oppressive doctrine that is practiced under the guise of Christianity today. No offense :P

------------------

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hellraiser:
The simple way in which the first century Christians believed is far more compelling to me than the ritualistic, disassociated, denominational, oppressive doctrine that is practiced under the guise of Christianity today.

---

I agree with most of what you say here, Hellraiser. There are certainly tons of churches that fit this description, but not all of them. Sure, there are plenty of chrches which aren't accepting of different beliefs or lifestyles, but you shouldn't generalize to say this is true of all of them. As for the more spontaneous and sincere sort of worship, you may have to look a bit harder, but these groups are out there.

Look for any church with lots of young people, or a youth group within a church, and you may find some less conservative worshippers similar to those disciples dancing in the streets all those years ago. There are plenty of churches out there with everything from ultra-conservative and ritualistic worship services to places where electric guitars and video screens make up a large part of the atmosphere. Just try to avoid anything that seems like a cult...

[This message has been edited by Michael (edited September 18, 2000).]

------------------

in general, even the young people i've met that are really outspoken (i.e. dancing in the street) about god are those who insist you follow how they believe.

i'm not sure that hellraiser was looking for someone to tell him 'hey, this is how you can get back to organized religion', maybe he was, maybe he wasn't. just seems to me like the return comment to his 'i've found my own niche' was 'well go out and join a church group full of young people.'

after a lot of encounters with the young & religious, i've come to the conclusion that young != open-minded.

------------------
kuru
'if your children ever found out how lame you are, they'd kill you in your sleep.' -frank zappa

------------------

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michael:
I agree with most of what you say here, Hellraiser. There are certainly tons of churches that fit this description, but not all of them. Sure, there are plenty of chrches which aren't accepting of different beliefs or lifestyles, but you shouldn't generalize to say this is true of all of them. As for the more spontaneous and sincere sort of worship, you may have to look a bit harder, but these groups are out there.

Look for any church with lots of young people, or a youth group within a church, and you may find some less conservative worshippers similar to those disciples dancing in the streets all those years ago. There are plenty of churches out there with everything from ultra-conservative and ritualistic worship services to places where electric guitars and video screens make up a large part of the atmosphere. Just try to avoid anything that seems like a cult...

---

Bummer... I was thinking of joining Heaven's Gate 2000! I guess I can't do that though, because I'm supposed to avoid cults.

Seriously though, I was not trying to say that all churches are like that, just the vast majority of the ones I have seen; some to a lesser and some to a greater degree. But one thing almost all of the churches I have seen have in common is people who are intolerant of other peoples beliefs, even when their own beliefs lack biblical backing. I hate hypocrites, people who say one thing, and do another. That has turned me off to the whole Church scene.

As for your statement about churches with young people, it depends. I was involved in a youth group for several years, which was great because there wasn't any religious overtones. Then we got a new youth pastor who had decidedly differnt leanings, and I could no longer be a part of it. I cannot be a part of something I don't believe in.

Honesty is by far the most important thing to me. Especially self honesty.

"This above all: to thine own self be true." - William Shakespeare.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hellraiser:
Honesty is by far the most important thing to me. Especially self honesty.

---

Yes, I definatey agree with that. What I was really saying about "young" churches is that they're less likely to be bound by tradition, ritualistic, conservative, etc. In other words, they're more interesting.

But of course that doesn't mean that they're more tolerant or less likely to try to push their views on you. After all, you don't see many older people doing that door-to-door evangelism that we all seem to be united in opposing.

If it sounds like I've been going to a lot of effort to urge people to join a youth group, any youth group, it's only because I think it's such a great opportunity to meet other people that think like you do and to have a lot of fun. Of course, not all youth groups are like that.

this is not to say that all young religious people are one way, i know that's not the case. it's just that i've never seen a group of young christians who didn't have at least a couple people in it whose minds were so closed i had to wonder if they were brainwashed as toddlers.... for this reason, i generally don't go to any organized functions where there'll be a lot of religious people. i hang out with my friends, some of whom are religious, and once in a while, we talk about what we believe. i don't know why you're tryin so hard to get everyone to go to youth groups, it's not as if you can safely assume that nobody else has had experience with them.

------------------
kuru
'if your children ever found out how lame you are, they'd kill you in your sleep.' -frank zappa

One thing that really annoyed me in many of the posts here is that people assume that all churches are the same and that they are all trying to indoctrinate people and tell them what to believe. That is far from being the case, but I've seen enough churches that were like that to understand why people might get a negative view of all churches. I was just trying to point out that there are so many differences, even inside denominations, that you really can't generalize about all churches.

I considered adding here that some of you seem to be operating on the sort of counter-culture mentality that has you resisting any beliefs of previous generations on principle, but if I said that I would definitely get flamed so I won't bring up that subject right now...

My religion has been perhaps one of the best positive influences on my life over the years. Of course, this is the same thing that people were saying about drugs in a different rant, so I may not sound much different to you than those people did to me.

I believe that I have heard God telling me what to do in my life, and that every decision I have made has been guided by God. Furthermore, I know people who have had everything from colds to cancer cured by prayer, so I believe that prayer can have a real effect. And I also believe that all the evil in the world and in history is not caused by religion, but by a lack of faith. And I also believe that God lived among us and died for us all, and then rose again from the dead.

Don't bother to dispute that last paragraph because there's no way to prove or disprove that sort of thing, so even if you think my beliefs are baseless you have no firmer (or weaker) foundation for your own opinions. You'll notice that I clearly stated that this is my beliefs; I'm not trying to force them on anyone else or state them as fact.

Now, onto the rest.
"a) It glorifies the irrational and demeans the rational" Please explain, I do not see how it demeans the rational.

"b) It has historically been an impediment to change and improvement in society" Also, Please explain, I do not see how it has been an impediment to change and improvement in society.

"c) It encourages exclusivity, which has been a major cause of bloodshed throughout history" I agree, except that it was the "ancient" Catholic church which caused most of these wars, and why do you blame the Christians of today for the crimes of long dead Christians that they do not even know?

"d) It encourages a view of humans as intrinsically pitiful, depraved, and helpless" This I do not agree with. How did you get the idea that the church encourages a view of humans as depraved. From my experience, churches generally praise people for doing good things, also churches also praise people for becoming successful with the "help" of God. Christianity does not encourage a view that humans are depraved. It encourages a view that people are good and kind.

"e) It serves as an easy justification for attrocities (and in some cases encourages them - see Leviticus 20:13, Deuteronomy 22:28)" Please explain in more detail.

Next, I have never before heard of a parent keeping medical attention from a child because they "knew" their faith would heal them. If you know of such an event, please let me know and point me in the direction to read about it.

And all the Christians I know don't hate, dislike, or are even uncomfortable with homosexuals. In fact I do have homosexual friends. Now for the pre-marital sex part. Nowadays, all of the christians I know don't even care if a women has sex or not before they get married. It's up to the woman do whatever the she wants.

And now.....MY FINAL QUESTION....YEAH!!!
Why do you insist on forcing the actions and beliefs of a singe or multiple churches upon every single church on this planet? Its almost as if I walked out on the street, met 3 assholes in a row and after that I would assume that every other person I meet is an asshole to. If it is at all possible for you to react to this post without anger or rational thought then do not, but if you are not a juvenile reacting angrily because we have a different belief then please, by all means, I would love a response.

------------------

The_Hiro said:

quote:

---

Okay. Let's go out and kill all the homosexuals, and stone women to death for entering into marriage without their virginities intact.

---

This entire nonsense of stoning and killing sinners was directly addressed by Jesus (don't have chapter/verse right here): A bunch of folks brought a woman to Jesus who had been caught in adultery, and asked what to do. After all, the penalty was stoning to death. Jesus didn't respond, and when asked again, he replied, "Those among you without fault, cast the first stone." He turned his back, and one by one the accusors left. When he turned back around, the woman was alone. "Where are your prosecutors?" he asked. "They have all left," she replied. "Neither do I condemn thee," Jesus said. "Go and sin no more."

One more (horribly mangled) quote goes "Before noting the mote in your neighbor's eye, first remove the beam from your own."

While many people may condemn and rail against folks who make mistakes, the Bible reminds us that we are screwed up enough ourselves that we have no place to go and judge others' worth or "goodness".

The_Hiro said:

quote:

---

There's no way to dispute the existence of Santa Claus either. Or invisible pink unicorns for that matter.

---

True, but there is one big difference: Neither Santa Claus nor invisible pink unicors have a rather large, very very old book that maintains that it is a historical recording devoted to them. My guess is that if you found a 3000-year old manuscript detailing the life of a rose-colored unicorn that no one could see, and then had it touted as absolute fact and had it distributed to most of the literate world, you would have a few converts.

------------------
--Jynx

"If it's not one thing, it's two."

WHY DO CHRISTIANS ALWAYS HAVE TO ACT LIKE THEY'RE BEING PERSECUTED AND/OR MARTYRED?

The MAJORITY of the people in this country consider themselves Christian. So it's hard to see how they're being persecuted, and even harder to see how the MINORITY that complains about them are trying to INFRINGE CHRISTIAN RIGHTS... we're trying to prevent what Socrates called "tyranny of the majority."

-You do NOT have the right to force your prayers and your Ten Commandments on us at school or other public places.

-You do NOT have the right to impose your morality on people that do no harm other than offending you (i.e. homosexuals.)

-If you think you're being "persecuted," you are an idiot.

For that matter, Jesus was an idiot... he was the Son of God, he could've WHIPPED ROMAN ASS. And why not? Why die on the cross for our sins, when he could've just said "yeah, bitch, TRY and nail me on that cross!!!" - he healed the sick and lame, he walked on water, so I'm sure he could've busted out of jail... I mean, come on, why martyr yourself when writing "I AM LORD, BUT I'M A COOL GUY AND I FORGIVE YOU" in nice big flaming letters in the sky would've been a lot more effective?

And since when you consider the GLOBAL population, the Buddhists far outnumber Christians, why not come on back to Earth and show everyone who's boss?

BECAUSE HE AIN'T REAL, THAT'S WHY!!!!

quote:

---

Originally posted by damien_s_lucifer:
-You do NOT have the right to force your prayers and your Ten Commandments on us at school or other public places.

---

Here we go with stereotypes again... not all Christians are as intollerant as you are suggesting. I have met few Christians who believe that religion should be forced on students in school, or on anyone else, for that matter.

At least the majority of the people on this bulletin board know what they're talking about. You, on the other hand, seem to not even know the Christian story.

As for the whole thing about how Jesus should have beat up the Romans rather than letting them kill him, if he had done so he would have violated a dozen different prophecies and furthermore would not have achieved his true objective, which was not to destroy the world but to save it. In fact, the whole reason that the people, who had recently welcomed Jesus, turned on him and wanted him killed was that they realized he was not going to be the military leader they expected.

If Jesus hadn't died, the whole story would have been pointless. Big flaming letters across the sky would not have been more effective. And besides, you're forgetting the most important part, which is that Jesus wasn't a martyr because HE DIDN'T STAY DEAD.

A.) There is a big difference between following the teachings of Jesus Christ, and the majority of the "Christian" faith. I'm not saying ALL "Christians," just most.

B.) Most of the teachings of Christ were teaching people to tolerate each other, forgive one another, teaching people that they cannot hold higher standards to people that they themselves cannot keep, teaching people to try to understand each other rather than hate each other.

C.) Before you go off on what Christ said and did, and why he did it, it would serve you well to read the New Testament. That's the best record we have of what he said and did, and the basis of the Christian faith.

D.) The_Hiro: for once I was surprised by the lack of research on the part of your post: the life of Christ was 33 years in the new testament, 1500 years (give or take) after Moses was said to pen the first five books of the Bible. In the New Testament, Christ laid out a new testament that superceded the Mosaic law, in which none of the ideas you claim Christianity stands for appear.

E.) Throughout the years, many people who have followed the teachings of Christ have been persecuted, most notibly by the Catholic Church, which definitely does not follow the teachings of Christ, and should not be called Christian. Tell me one place in the Bible where Christ even once mentioned interceding with him through his mother, and I'll eat those words.

F.) Many "Christians" are under the mistaken impression that they are supposed to "evangalize" the world; that directive was given to the 12, and was simply to tell people what they had seen. Therefore, it does not apply to everyone in the Christian faith.

G.) In no place in the New Testament does it say you earn brownie points for heaven by doing good deeds, or evangelizing people. There are some guidelines, such as some things that are wrong and right, but most of those were written by Paul, to specific churches, as advice for how to correct and prevent problems. Christ himself said the two greatest commands were: to love your God with all your heart, and to love your neighbor as yourself. He doesn't qualify this by saying, "except if he's gay." And believe me, there were plenty of gay people in those times as well. Christ also said to do unto others as you would have them do unto you. From this, it is clear that he was against prejudice and racism of any kind.

H.) I will not commit to being a Christian, because I don't hold with the concept the word brings to many people's minds: going to a building to get sermonized every Sunday (show me where Christ said to do that in the bible), expressing prejudice towards those who are not "Christian," following a set of strict moral rules (show me where Christ said to do that in the bible), attempting to force one's beliefs on others (Christ told his disciples to spread word about what they had seen and heard, by now, the word is spread well enough that who wants to can go to the local bookstore and buy a copy of a record of those events if they want to. I'd say that the word has been spread. So why is there still evangelizing today?), and all that. I do believe there is a God, and I believe to an extent the teachings of Christ in the New Testament, but that's as far as I will commit to.

Before you tell me I have no basis for the things I've said about Christians and the bible, I have seen many different denominations of Christians, and I have read the bible cover to cover at least 6 times, so I do know what I am talking about.

One thing that many people do not seem to be capable of is reading the bible as a record of events, rather than taking one "verse" (verse is a misconception about the way the bible was written: when the King James version was originally translated, it was divided into chapters and verses by the translators. In reality, no such division exists in the original scrolls.) out of the whole book and saying or implying "this is in the bible, so the whole book is about this." The bible was written by man, and as such has errors in it. Some believe it was inspired by God, but even divine inspiration is not likely to overcome man's tendency to see things from one viewpoint. Viewpoints tend to introduce errors: when I see something from my perspective, write it down, and you read it from your perspective, some of the original event has been lost, and most likely, some has been added or inferred by either myself or you in the process.

Just a few things for you to think over before you post any more bigotted or ignorant posts to this thread.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michael:
Jesus wasn't a martyr because HE DIDN'T STAY DEAD.

---

Prove it.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Phaedrus:
Prove it.

---

Spartacus lead a slave revolt, the Roman army killed him and many of the other slaves who revolted, and from then on there was no attempt by the slaves to gain freedom.

Cicero spoke out against Caesar and tried to remind the people of the glorious days of the Republic. Cicero was proscribed and his head was displayed on the rostrum, and those who had been talking about reinstating the Republic became very quiet very fast.

That wacko down in Waco tried to convince people that he was the second Christ, Delta Force barbecued them, and you will have a hard time finding anyone now who believes in him.

Jesus proclaimed that he was the Messaiah, and was judged by the Sanhedrin and crucified by the Romans, and a century after his death the Christian church had spread not only throughout Jewish civilization, but throughout the Roman empire and even to Africa and Asia.

Read through the book of Acts (in the New Testament, right after the Gospels) some time: it tells the early history of the Christian church. You will not be able to say that the people described in this book are a group whose leader is dead. The Christians did not even begin to come alive until after the death and ressurection of Christ.

I've been avoiding using Biblical citations up to now, but this one is just perfect to show my point: Acts 5: 29-39:

quote:

---

Peter and the other apostles replied: "We must obey God rather than men! The God of our fathers raised Jesus from the dead--whom you had killed by hanging him on a tree. God exalted him to his own right hand as Prince and Savior that he might give repentance and forgiveness of sins to Israel. We are witnesses of these things, and so is the Holy Spirit, whom God has given to those who obey him."

When they heard this, they were furious and wanted to put them to death. But a Pharisee named Gamaliel, a teacher of the law, who was honored by all the people, stood up in the Sanhedrin and ordered that the men be put outside for a little while. Then he addressed them: "Men of Israel, consider carefully what you intend to do to these men. Some time ago Theudas appeared, claiming to be somebody, and about four hundred men rallied to him. He was killed, all his followers were dispersed, and it all came to nothing. After him, Judas the Galilean appeared in the days of the census and led a band of people in revolt. He too was killed, and all his followers were scattered.

Therefore, in the present case I advise you: Leave these men alone! Let them go! For if their purpose or activity is of human origin, it will fail. But if it is from God, you will not be able to stop these men; you will only find yourselves fighting against God."

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michael:
I considered adding here that some of you seem to be operating on the sort of counter-culture mentality that has you resisting any beliefs of previous generations on principle, but if I said that I would definitely get flamed so I won't bring up that subject right now...

---

Yeah, it's a good thing you didn't say anything like that. Oh wait, you did. But I guess you're immune to flaming, since you remembered to use the "I-never-brought-the- subject-up" clause. Damn. And I was sooo looking forward to flaming you.

If you really must know, I'm opposed to Christianity for a great many reasons (and not because I subscribe to a counter-culture mentality as you seem to believe). Here are my reasons:
a) It glorifies the irrational and demeans the rational;
b) It has historically been an impediment to change and improvement in society;
c) It encourages exclusivity, which has been a major cause of bloodshed throughout history;
d) It encourages a view of humans as intrinsically pitiful, depraved, and helpless;
e) It serves as an easy justification for attrocities (and in some cases encourages them - see Leviticus 20:13, Deuteronomy 22:28).

I think that's sufficient justification. However, if you want me to suppy more reasons, just ask.

quote:

---

I know people who have had everything from colds to cancer cured by prayer, so I believe that prayer can have a real effect.

---

Colds naturally go away, and cancer is known to go into remission from time to time (without the intervention of prayer). There is no need to postulate a supernatural explanation for recovery in these instances. In fact, I think doing so can be harmful (As in the cases where fervently believing parents have insisted on prayer as a legitimate means of curing their sick children, denying them proper medical attention. A number of children have died unnecessarily as a result of their parents' 'faith').

quote:

---

And I also believe that all the evil in the world and in history is not caused by religion, but by a lack of faith.

---

Okay. Let's go out and kill all the homosexuals, and stone women to death for entering into marriage without their virginities intact. I'm sure that if we just have faith in The Lord's vision, and live by his decrees, the world will be a much nicer place. A happy place.

quote:

---

And I also believe that God lived among us and died for us all, and then rose again from the dead. Don't bother to dispute that last paragraph because there's no way to prove or disprove that sort of thing

---

There's no way to dispute the existence of Santa Claus either. Or invisible pink unicorns for that matter. How many of us believe in either of these entities? Let's see a show of hands... Right.

quote:

---

Originally posted by darksol:
First, questions.
1. Where do you come from?
2. Is everything you know about Christianity from a history class?

---

1. Like all my fellow homo sapiens, I am a product of evolution and the process of natural selection. But geographically speaking, I'm from Toronto.

2. No. I have also had real life experience with fundamentalist zealots. And it's pretty much every week that I have to contend with 'well-meaning' Christians on campus, seeking to 'witness' me. I also try to keep up with current events.

quote:

---

Please explain, I do not see how it demeans the rational.

---

By making faith a greater virtue than reason. By insisting that God should not be questioned. By using a carrot and a stick as a basis for morality. The list goes on and on. And if you really want a lesson on irrationality, take a look at our friends down in Kansas.

quote:

---

I do not see how it has been an impediment to change and improvement in society.

---

The following are examples from the Bible:

quote:

---

1 Timothy 2:11-15
A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. ... women will be saved through childbearing...

Exodus 21:20-21
If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he is to be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property.

(See also 1 Peter 2:18-21)

---

I think we can both agree that slavery and the subjugation of women is wrong. But the Bible condones it. And such passages have historically been used to justify morally reprehensible acts (even today, attacks against homosexuals are justified by appeal to the Bible). Fortunately, most Christians today ignore such passages because they find them offensive and contrary to their moral sensibilities. I'm simply taking the next logical step, in advocating that we do away with the Bible altogether.

quote:

---

"c) It encourages exclusivity, which has been a major cause of bloodshed throughout history" I agree, except that it was the "ancient" Catholic church which caused most of these wars...

---

Why do Protestants always point the finger at the Catholics? Protestant sects also have a lot to account and atone for. Where to begin? Lutherans in Germany with their antisemitism; British Protestant Fundamentalists in Northern Ireland; Congregationalists, Presbyterians, and others of the same ilk, who were quick to attack the original Mormons; the Puritans who perpetrated heinous crimes against the Native Americans; the list is long, and the atrocities are many.

It also seems to me that the insults that Protestants like to lob at Catholics constitutes a form of exclusivity as well. I really don't understand what all the bickering is about. I do know one thing: it's the source of much misery and suffering.

quote:

---

How did you get the idea that the church encourages a view of humans as depraved.

---

'Amazing grace, how sweet the sound,
That saved a wretch like me...'

Seriously, though, have you ever heard of the doctrine of original sin? It says that before we're even born we're automatically sinners. And the only way we can escape an eternity in hell is to kowtow before God and love Jesus (I guess that means you'll find Gandhi, Isaac Asimov, and a lot of Buddhist monks in Hell. And I guess if I'm to believe everything that's said about Roman Catholics, Mother Theresa's down there too).

quote:

---

"e) It serves as an easy justification for atrocities (and in some cases encourages them - see Leviticus 20:13, Deuteronomy 22:28)" Please explain in more detail.

---

Read the biblical passages in question and all will be revealed.

quote:

---

Next, I have never before heard of a parent keeping medical attention from a child because they "knew" their faith would heal them. If you know of such an event, please let me know and point me in the direction to read about it.

---

Jehovah's Witnesses don't accept blood transfusions. Christian Scientists won't accept medical treatment. Their faith kills them and their children. Tragic and stupid.

quote:

---

And all the Christians I know don't hate, dislike, or are even uncomfortable with homosexuals. ... all of the christians I know don't even care if a women has sex or not before they get married. It's up to the woman do whatever the she wants.

---

My point wasn't that all Christians are bad. My point was that the Bible is flawed, and that Christianity is outdated and inappropriate for this day and age. Kudos to those Christians (like yourself) who reject the unpalatable parts of the Bible. The unfortunate reality however, is that others often find justification in the Bible for their bigotry, hate, and ignorance. That's what I rail against. Furthermore, I find the hostility that exists between religious sects troubling. I think we should simply do away with all of it, and start fresh without the bad metaphysics and the bad ethics.

quote:

---

Originally posted by The_Hiro:
My point wasn't that all Christians are bad. My point was that the Bible is flawed, and that Christianity is outdated and inappropriate for this day and age. Kudos to those Christians (like yourself) who reject the unpalatable parts of the Bible. The unfortunate reality however, is that others often find justification in the Bible for their bigotry, hate, and ignorance. That's what I rail against. Furthermore, I find the hostility that exists between religious sects troubling. I think we should simply do away with all of it, and start fresh without the bad metaphysics and the bad ethics.

---

Perhaps you should read the bible more before you touch a topic like this. For one thing, the bible was written in a different culture than we are in now. For another thing, biblically speaking, the old testament is no more than a record of events and outmoded laws. The new testament supercedes it in the Christian faith.

Jehovah's Witnesses and Christian Scientists are not exactly Christians, they do not follow most of the teachings of Christ.

Many misunderstandings that both Christians and Non-Christians have about the bible, etc., I explained in my previous post, so I will not go into here.

First of all, when Paul gives his opinions about what is morally correct:

1) He is telling his disciples to follow the mores and customs of the day. He is not trying to outline a set of moral standards which will hold true for all time. These statutes were already laid out in the Ten Commandments.

2) He is telling them what his opinion is, not trying to state an imperative from God. For instance, in 1 Cor. 7:25 he specifically says "I have no command from the Lord, but I give judgement as one who by the Lord's mercy is trustworty" etc. He and he writers of the other epistles are urging their followers to obey the morals of the day.

3) Slavery meant something completely different 2000 years ago in Jewish culture than it does today. if a person could not pay a debt, they became a slave to the person to whom they owed that debt, but they would be freed after seven years. Roman slaves were oftn slaves for life, but they were not mistreated in the same way that slaves in present times have been.

The_Hiro also wrote: Seriously, though, have you ever heard of the doctrine of original sin? It says that before we're even born we're automatically sinners.

You're talking about Calvinists here. Not all Christians believe this, in fact very few do.

The idea of original sin in the bible taken literally is that each of us has within us a capacity for both evil and good. Anyone can agree with that. It goes on to state (truthfully) that none of us go through life without doing anything wrong. We all have done something we believe to be evil or wrong at some point or another in our lives.

The idea presented in Christ's teachings was if you admit your wrong, and ask the parties wronged for forgiveness (your deity if you have one being one of the wronged parties), and you forgive yourself above all and accept the forgiveness of others, there is no condemnation for you afterwards.

And also, one of the teachings of Christ is that God has infinite forgiveness for our failings; he knows we are imperfect beings. If we accept this forgiveness, and the gift of his life, then he will accept us as we are, and nothing we can do will separate us from him. In the teachings of Christ, God is not portrayed as a vindictive and prejudical deity, but rather as one who created man with the ability to chose his destiny, and an infinite amount of patience and forgiveness for mankind.

The epistles of the Apostles and Paul (who was not one of the 12) were written to specific people and churches, with specific information that applied to them. As such, they provide a valuable record of what was happening at the time, and what it was like, but do not necessarily say that God supports certain viewpoints.

They should be read and interpreted with care.

second, there ARE 3000 year old manuscripts that depict the existence of such things as lions with the head of a man, golden chariots that race across the sky, a man with winged feet, etc... and today we call these things 'myths.'

third, i have a problem with anything that refers to its members as 'sheep' and its central figure as a shepherd. maybe it's just a bad analogy, but blindly following the leader has never been for me.

lastly, as far as being risen from the dead, this was 2000 years ago, and medical technology wasn't what it is today. in fact, up until about a hundred years ago, one of the things people feared was being buried alive, since there was no totally reliable way of establishing death. people didn't know about comas etc, which is why there was often a week long wake before someone was buried. there are books and books about the elaborate means people went to in order to make sure they wouldn't be buried alive, so i consider it a possibility that even IF there was a man who was hanged on a cross, he could very well have been entombed ALIVE but comatose, and woken up three days later.
unlikely, yeah... but so is the possibilty that a dead person can come back to life.

------------------
kuru
'if your children ever found out how lame you are, they'd kill you in your sleep.' -frank zappa

quote:

---

Originally posted by kuru:
he could very well have been entombed ALIVE but comatose, and woken up three days later.

---

You're saying that after being nailed to a cross and asphyxiating, and then being stabbed in the stomach by a spear, and all this after a rather brutal flogging by the Roman soldiers, you think it would be possible that a person would not only enter a coma, but come out of it alive after three days, and furthermore appear, if not uninjured, then at least not about to die? I believe you said you used to be pre-med: you probably know more about this than I do, but aren't comas generally induced by trauma to the brain?

As for the validity of the texts, we have found scrolls of Biblical writings from several millenia ago, and they line up very closely with the versions which had been copied and handed down to us by scribes. Not every single word may be the same, but it is unlikely that the Bible has been accidentally changed enough to significantly distort anything more than the most trivial details.

quote:

---

Originally posted by kuru:
lastly, as far as being risen from the dead, this was 2000 years ago, and medical technology wasn't what it is today. in fact, up until about a hundred years ago, one of the things people feared was being buried alive, since there was no totally reliable way of establishing death. people didn't know about comas etc, which is why there was often a week long wake before someone was buried. there are books and books about the elaborate means people went to in order to make sure they wouldn't be buried alive, so i consider it a possibility that even IF there was a man who was hanged on a cross, he could very well have been entombed ALIVE but comatose, and woken up three days later.
unlikely, yeah... but so is the possibilty that a dead person can come back to life.

---

in my history class i remember something about having air tunnels down to the casket and/or a bell with a string tied to it so if the person woke up (s)he could alert someone to dig them out.

i "think" comas can be cause by extreme stress, not just brain truma.

asphyxiating??? isn't that when you inhale to much CO2? if so how did they asphyxiate him?

------------------
A good programmer is someone who looks both ways on a one-way street

each person who passes it on adds a little more to it, until it's nothing like it orginally was. none of us were there, none of us actually saw the actual events, and none of us can say FOR SURE that this one book that's been rewritten, retold, copied, and translated countless times is accurate anymore.

it's hard enough in this day and age to get the real story or the real facts, even now that we often have multiple cameras on scene as the events unfold.

------------------
kuru
'if your children ever found out how lame you are, they'd kill you in your sleep.' -frank zappa

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hellraiser:
F.) Many "Christians" are under the mistaken impression that they are supposed to "evangalize" the world; that directive was given to the 12, and was simply to tell people what they had seen. Therefore, it does not apply to everyone in the Christian faith.

---

You're telling me that 'The Great Commission' is a big misunderstanding? If it weren't so sad, I'd probably be laughing right now.

Can you direct me to an independent source that verifies this? I want to be certain on this point, so that I can tell those who try to evangelize me, to back off (politely of course, but with greater authority).

You learn something new every day.

quote:

---

Originally posted by pengu1nn:
asphyxiating??? isn't that when you inhale to much CO2? if so how did they asphyxiate him?

---

The way that crucifixion kills you is quite simple: you body is hanging by your arms, which are held out at right angles. Thus, your rib cage slowly collapses under your own body weight. The only way to be able to breate normally is to push yourself up using your legs, since your feet are all nailed in place. You can keep breathing normally for as long as your legs can hold you up. Thus, it can take quite a long time to die, but it is asphyxiation and not blood loss or anything else which will kill you. This isn't really relevant, and doesn't prove much except that the Romans were not nice people, but just in case you wanted to know...

Fact: Unless you've witnessed it with your own eyes, or have tanglible evidence of its occurance, you cannot assuredly say that a certain act transpired.

Like Kuru said, there are several antiquities all over the world that reflect mythical stories, many of which are older than Christ. Seeing how there is no concrete evidence proving Christ's words (or the words of any other religous leader) as correct, what makes some people have blind faith in religion?

In 90\% of the situation, I'd say the answer is parental influence. Sure, some people convert or "find Jesus," but the majority of religious people have religious parents. If you fall into this category, ask yourself, "would I hold the same beliefs if I was born in Bombay, India?" Chances are you wouldn't. That, in essence, sums up the crux of religion's failing - it's regional bias. How could "the truth" be so geographically exclusive?

Here's a relevant story: One day in church, a pastor told the crowd that unless we all accepted Jesus into our hearts, we would not go to heaven. Okay, nice scare tactic...but what about the Hindu kid in Bombay who's never even heard of Jesus and dies an untimely death? Does he go to hell?

It seems that there are too many biases and loopholes in the belief system of contemporary religions, the above being only one. I have a tough time believing that something truly representative of God could be so flawed.

In addition, no one here knows for sure if Jesus was the man he is depicted as. Similarly, all of this Bible quoting is pure speculation; unsupported faith based beliefs. Martyrs (like Jesus) and legends (like the Bible) become larger than life as their stories change hands and grow older. That is a factual pattern, also noted by the fact that William Wallace was nothing like Braveheart would have you think. With a tale as old as the Bible, I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of puffing was injected over time.

Oh yeah...one last thing. I heard a Christian denouncing the big bang theory on the account that "nothing cannot possibly explode into something, and create the universe." My reply to this was, "so where did God come from? And while you're at it, tell me how you know God didn't cause the big bang."

Avoiding the first question, he replied, "Because the Bible says so."

I just laughed.

quote:

---

Fact: Unless you've witnessed it with your own eyes, or have tanglible evidence of its occurance, you cannot assuredly say that a certain act transpired.

---

I Agree completely, most history books are based on interpretations of old documents by historians who simply weren't there to witness the events they are describing.
I don't know if you are aware of the fact that there was a political revolution in Portugal about 26 years ago and most of the facts about it are just now being revealed. My parents happened to be in college at the time and, seing that colege students were involved in most of the political/social unrest at the time, they witnessed a lot of the political events described in most published works on this subject and have told me that some of these works describe some of these events innacuratly, like who was involved in what, etc, besides the fact that many historians have different versions of what really happened.
I'm not saying that EVERYTHING in history books is wrong, I just think that you should take descriptions of small details (like the chain of events in a revolution for example) and especially quotes and such with a grain of salt, ESPECIALLY from the Bible (and other religious books/scriptures).

P.S. Sorry if my text is a little confusing, I haven't written in english for a LOOOONG time. Oh, and BTW, I'm a Christian and I'm not a zealot or a creationist or any of that

This message has been edited by Evolution on September 27, 2000 at 11:20 AM

I've been away from my computer for several days, so I just read the entire thread. I've got LOTS to say, so once I do all my reading and referencing I'll have a post for everyone's reading enjoyment (?)....hopefully it'll be ready by morning, though perhaps not until I get home from work tomorrow (3:30-4:00pm eastern time).

------------------
When my flying days are over, and my death has come to pass
I hope they bury me upside down, so the whole damn world can kiss my ass

This message has been edited by j0eSmith on September 27, 2000 at 11:08 PM

------------------
Whats the point?

< seprate? >

This message has been edited by pengu1nn on September 28, 2000 at 08:15 AM

I think it's a wonderful thing. There's the argument that it's a crutch, etc., but I think that faith in something is really, well, cool.

As for which is true or false, well, I kind of believe in them all, I'm seriously considering becoming initiated as a wiccan, I've been thinking about it for a long time.

I think that there is something out there, a force that binds us all, keeps us common to everything else.

Even if there's no summerlands, no place for our consciousnesses to roam when we die, isn't it marvellous that we are still part of the Earth that spawned us? And when that is absorbed into our sun, and our sun breaks down, atoms that were us, heat that we were part of the cycle of, all stays in the universe?

In a hundred thousand million years, the atoms that make you up may be part of someone elses mind, tapping on their computer, a million light years from the place we called home. It's wonderful.

What I dislike are the fanatics, the ones that push what they believe down your throat without your permission, however you can't pin this down to any particular religion, people will be assholes whatever colour, creed, religion, whatever. That's life.

If you believe in something, or even if you don't, I respect that. If everyone else held a similar view I'm sure the world would be a much friendlier place.

Mike

------------------
-- incubus
As I chase the leaves like the words I never find ...

Just thought you might find it interesting.

------------------
Just your generic meaningless signature. Mix with 2 quarts water and stir till evenly coated.