The Religion Discussion

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

^ Nat Geo has TONS of documentaries showing that dinosaurs were extinct for millions of years before humans showed up. So if you don't believe them when they say that, why would you believe Nat geo when they say the ark was found?

there is NO scientific evidence that shows the existence of dragons.

there is NO scientific evidence of "to show that man lived with dinos" please show us the "paintings, models and even that intact blood tissue found in the t-rex" that you speak of.

One passage describing some large creature cannot compare to TONS of bones, fossils, carbon records, evolved species etc etc etc etc etc that have been found and scientifically proven to be real.

YOu said that the creatures in Job could be "liopleurodon or even a megalodon". How do you know what a "liopleurodon or megalodon" looked like? You are basing it on what palaeontologists say they look like from their research that you saw in science books. SO you want to use THEIR scientific description of a "liopleurodon or even a megalodon" to claim Job description is right but yet you reject their science when they say these animals became extinct millions of year before humans.

Seems that you are picking and choosing only the things that you want to believe... the things that you are comfortable with.

[MG Man]

. I think there's plenty of evidence around the world to show that man lived with dinos from paintings, models and even that intact blood tissue found in the t-rex.

dude you for real???????????

[d spike]

And all of those descriptions about the specimens found in job still can describe some sort of sauropod type dino

All???? Which part of my post did you actually read???

I simply think there was something greater being described than what we know today.

Yes... it's called mythology. In Jewish aprocrypha, Behemoth is the primal unconquerable monster of the land, as Leviathan is the primal monster of the waters of the sea and Ziz the primordial monster of the sky.
Jewish sources describe Leviathan as a dragon who lives over the Sources of the Deep and who, along with the male land-dragon Behemoth, will be served up to the righteous at the end of time.

Even marco polo ranted on dragons didn't he?

Does that fact provide proof of their existence?

I think there's plenty of evidence around the world to show that man lived with dinos from paintings, models and even that intact blood tissue found in the t-rex.

You "think" that??? Well... that explains a lot. Deposition of proof - not assumption of its existence - is evidence.

Never saw that awesome description...

What????
But it is in the following chapter to that which describes the behemoth... That means you are arguing about writing that you have never read... Good grief.

[MG Man]

u almost wanna say 'jesus [edited] christ'

[mediahouse]

An islamic view on Evolution , creation, and existence of god.

Hope this answers the Atheist questions about religion and gods origin etc..




Does Holy Quran goes against Darwin's Theory of Evolution? Dr Zakir Naik



Who Created God? Dr. Zakir Naik answers this question.



Dr. Zakir Naik on Evolution and Concept of God


Why don't ALLAH come down and say I am GOD so that every one will be a Muslim? Dr Zakir Naik



As God is Kind why Natural Disaster take place? Dr Zakir Naik

[MG Man]

rhetorical nonsense

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

mediahouse that last video on God testing us doesnt really make sense in the way Dr. Naik stated it.

what of the pious people who died but suffered great pain and suffering before they died?
what of children born with painful disease and have to bear this pain for 10 years before they die?

He said when the suffering is great it may be a higher level test to get into a higher level of heaven: a Masters or Phd instead of a Bachelors - but WE can choose to take these harder Phd tests to get the greater rewards - whereas God chooses which test we take - in his analogy some people never get these "harder tests" while some suffer from birth, why?

these explanations may be sufficient to you and people who have faith in your beliefs - but these explanations lack coherence to people like MG Man who do not use faith to help explain the universe and do not believe what you believe and so it is not going to convince him or anyone else like him.

[AllTrac]

hey Duane, dont think I need powerseller for this, but just wanted you guys to know, if you are looking for someone to build an ark, contact me cause I NOAH a guy

[mediahouse]

Mg man there is no scientific evidence of the world poped into existence only theories , share your evidence if so.

And also what about the bad people who killing etc and stealing? They will just die and thats it? so therefore this world is unjust people can do as they please and get away when they die?

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

Mg man there is no scientific evidence of the world poped into existence only theories , share your evidence if so.

I know I'm not MG Man but no one said the world popped into existence. There is scientific evidence that the universe expanded from a super dense point. It is the most accepted explanation based on evidence by the scientific community, the same scientific community that develops medicine and technology that you use.

And also what about the bad people who killing etc and stealing? They will just die and thats it? so therefore this world is unjust people can do as they please and get away when they die?

Why do people need the promise of hell and punishment to prevent them from doing wrong? MG Man does not believe in hell but he is human and humans all have morals and values as part of their conscience that do not necessarily require religion to keep from doing wrong.

you should not do right because you fear punishment - you should do right out of compassion for your fellow men and all living things. Regardless of what theological, religious, agnositic or atheistic ideals you follow.

[Chimera]

hey Duane, dont think I need powerseller for this, but just wanted you guys to know, if you are looking for someone to build an ark, contact me cause I NOAH a guy

*takes away people's mod status due to overwhelming lameness of joke*

[d spike]

Mg man there is no scientific evidence of the world poped into existence only theories , share your evidence if so.

Mediahouse, that is the wrong way to approach this argument. Neither of you have evidence of how the world "popped into existence". (I don't know about it being "poped into existence", though... as powerful the Bishop of Rome may be, I don't think he is that good... you will have to ask a Catholic historian about that )
As neither of you (or anyone else) was there when it happened, the only "evidence" you have is the scribblings of some fellows... the only "evidence" he has is also the scribblings of some fellows...
The problem is that there are more books scribbled by fellows who have studied the matter and tested their theories first before writing about it, than there are books scribbled by fellows who tried to remember what was told to them by ONE person (who claimed to have been told all this by an angel/god/burning bush/bowl of pasta)...
I like the 'burning bush' concept of the divine, as it makes the most sense... any ras, looking sadly at the butt of a used joint, will agree emphatically with you that a bush that burns without being consumed is clearly of a wondrous and divine nature

And also what about the bad people who killing etc and stealing? They will just die and thats it? so therefore this world is unjust people can do as they please and get away when they die?

While the need to believe in divine justice due to the naturally unfair nature of life can create the concept of God (and there is nothing wrong with this type of belief origin) it certainly is NOT an argument in favour of the existence of God.
"Why" one believes is not linked by logic to "Who" one believes in. If the rationale for your belief in a particular faith is rooted in "evidence", then your faith is probably not "faith" at all.
If you really want to get involved in public discussions of this nature, I would strongly advise you to find a theologian (not a public spouter of rhetoric) who is of your faith, and study his work first.

Cheers

[DTAC]

so what you sayin its just co incidence or matter and atoms make the whole solar system and the sun and moon just happen to know to orbit earth?

The Earth orbits the Sun, not the other way around. Copernicus in the 1540's taught us that.

It is not coincidence that the Moon "knows"(?!) to orbit Earth. Before the solar system was created it was a cloud of dust that coalesced under gravity to create the Sun, smaller dense clouds coalescing into hundreds of planets that collide and get pulled into larger planets gravity. Moons are the result of collisions or smaller planets that are trapped by the large gravitational fields generated by bigger planets. It is a natural chain of occurrences. One thing precipitates the next.

If so better i start robbing and stealing and raping people since i have no sins to pay for so better i live a life of crime and wrong doings?

Wait. So you're saying that you would rape and rob if it wasn't for the fact that you believe that you'd pay a price for doing those things after you die?

[meccalli]

So what if I decide to pick and choose>>?? It's what my experiences are and i'm just presenting it to anyone who will listen or criticize. I am a bio student and I don't agree with alot of things when it comes to evolution..does that prevent me from attaining a high gpa..not in the least. Maybe falsified evidence sways me? but.. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7285683/ns/ ... ft-tissue/

considering this to be true would you expect me to believe that man did not see dinosaurs?
I'm not going to post every link on here..I urge you to do a search on 'ancient dinosaur carvings'..maybe you can prove these to be false and change my mind? I don't get the whole CAPS NO** evidence, when the Coelacanth, thought to be maybe your great great daddy>? when he crawled out of the water and developed into a land dwelling mammal 70 million years ago..long time brah. Oh wait..then then they saw it swimming merrily along its way, off Madagascar's coast.

I mean , that must be great news, you guys can go visit your family in the ocean.YAY,,,and you too, can say you still LIVE,saw, touch/ with a dinosaur in this present age...but don't ignore the turtles, birds, crocs and of course great uncle BIG stone in the backyard.

[meccalli]

Oh yeah,, there's a komodo dragon was gnna crack it until you guys went ape$h!t on me lol but..it was a joke when i said that. Why couldn't there be some acid/toxic/venomous spitting lizards mistaken for that. Dragons were average dinosaurs for all i care.
And if i read about behemoth and i looked at the verse, would that give you enough evidence to say i went on to read the rest of the book? Not to nitpick.. but your just as bad as whatever your labeling me as.

[sMASH]

what a ridiculois argument
u are using the 'complexity' argument, whereby if something exists, surely it can be traced back to a more complex entity, which would have created it...complex watch, created by even more complex machine, ie man.........so we trace this backwards to the uper-complex universe, and well by your logic, surely something more complex must have cerated it...ie gawd......then one must ask, how did this ultra complex gawd entity come into being......think carefully before you answer.....

and sMASH, u still haven't addressed my question, ie regardless of how well you treat your slaves, they are still someone's property, and therefore do not exist under the premise of free will......surely your religion does not crush such a precious idea as free will.....

officially yes, slaves would be considered the 'property' of their masters. they would be housed, clothed, provided for, and protected by their masters.
even today, with some people who need work, they don't have defined job specs, they just show up and do as the boss man tells them. some times they go to pick up the children, do grocery runs, help them out for prayers, plenty times after work hours as well. though they are compensated for the extra work in pay or time off at other times, the same sort of arrangement would have gone on with slaves. their job spec is just to do as the masters instruct. but they would get paid and extra pay or more lee way with extra work done. eventually they may earn freedom, or opt for a higher rank in the masters service.

but a person practising islam, should not keep slaves. there are stories, of which i cannot recall immediately, of slaves being purchased for the sheer purpose of granting them freedom, not unlike the anti slavery movement in the western societies in the 1900's or 1800's when ever it was.

in atoning for sins, the recommended action before reciting scripture, before praying, giving alms, before feeding the poor, is freeing slaves.

it is not encouraged, but allowed with humane treatment.

[d spike]

Why couldn't there be some acid/toxic/venomous spitting lizards mistaken for that.

Why couldn't there be??? I thought you said you were a "bio" student... Science is based on logic - not fantasy or wishful thinking. If you wish to take the references to behemoth and leviathan literally, then you cannot say that 'breathing fire' actually means 'acid/toxin/venom' - fire will mean 'fire'. (Remarkable that you will interpret 'breathing fire' as figurative language, but choose to accept "hardens like a cedar" literally. Logic dictates that you either accept that particular piece of prose literally or figuratively. Make up your mind.)

Dragons were average dinosaurs for all i care.

Really... for all you care, huh? I guess you should apply yourself to your studies a little more.

And if i read about behemoth and i looked at the verse, would that give you enough evidence to say i went on to read the rest of the book?

How can you judge an article based on a minor piece of it? And you are a "student"? You have a lot to learn about learning, my boy. I made the mistake of assuming that you were being serious in this discussion - no one in their right mind would seriously discuss a literary piece without studying it first. Pardon my errant assumption.

Not to nitpick.. but your just as bad as whatever your labeling me as.

As you have clearly shown that your opinion is based on wishful thinking rather than logic or rational thinking, what you have to say should not be taken too seriously.
Forgive my frankness, but for a student, you seem to show little interest in learning about the topic on hand before discussing it publicly. I trust (for the sake of your studies) that will change.

[brainchild]

@ sMASH..one human having ownership over another cannot be justified thru good care, if one wishes to care for someone in need they need simply do so. There were many slaves who were helped by their owners and by others who just didn't agree with it no matter what culture or time period you look at. This was not why i raised the issue tho, my initial argument was why would a deity that teaches the equality of all mankind condone such a practice? It was a food for thought question, not the kind that i expected a Muslim or Christian to answer through defense of scripture...cos u can't!

[turbohead]

this thread gettin like a honda goin nowhere fast....

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

Why couldn't there be some acid/toxic/venomous spitting lizards mistaken for that.

Why couldn't there be??? I thought you said you were a "bio" student... Science is based on logic - not fantasy or wishful thinking. If you wish to take the references to behemoth and leviathan literally, then you cannot say that 'breathing fire' actually means 'acid/toxin/venom' - fire will mean 'fire'. (Remarkable that you will interpret 'breathing fire' as figurative language, but choose to accept "hardens like a cedar" literally. Logic dictates that you either accept that particular piece of prose literally or figuratively. Make up your mind.)

Dragons were average dinosaurs for all i care.

Really... for all you care, huh? I guess you should apply yourself to your studies a little more.

And if i read about behemoth and i looked at the verse, would that give you enough evidence to say i went on to read the rest of the book?

How can you judge an article based on a minor piece of it? And you are a "student"? You have a lot to learn about learning, my boy. I made the mistake of assuming that you were being serious in this discussion - no one in their right mind would seriously discuss a literary piece without studying it first. Pardon my errant assumption.

Not to nitpick.. but your just as bad as whatever your labeling me as.

As you have clearly shown that your opinion is based on wishful thinking rather than logic or rational thinking, what you have to say should not be taken too seriously.
Forgive my frankness, but for a student, you seem to show little interest in learning about the topic on hand before discussing it publicly. I trust (for the sake of your studies) that will change.

meccalli, do you do well as a Bio student?

[d spike]

@ sMASH..one human having ownership over another cannot be justified thru good care, if one wishes to care for someone in need they need simply do so. There were many slaves who were helped by their owners and by others who just didn't agree with it no matter what culture or time period you look at. This was not why i raised the issue tho, my initial argument was why would a deity that teaches the equality of all mankind condone such a practice? It was a food for thought question, not the kind that i expected a Muslim or Christian to answer through defense of scripture...cos u can't!

The problem with this argument is the confusing of two wide concepts: the essence of a religion (and all the world's orthodox religions share the same essence or core), and the cultural aspect of that particular religion.
In Mohammed's time and culture, slavery was part of the cultural environment. In the same way that he spoke of how to cleanse oneself after defecating - and he didn't mention toilet paper or flush toilets - he also spoke of slavery. Just as gasoline-powered motor vehicles may one day be seen as foul and harmful, and the practice of driving one be frowned upon, so too was slavery seen in its time as a useful and beneficial practice if performed properly.

One has to remember that an author of scriptural writings - no matter how inspired - is still a man, and his thinking and writing will be influenced by his culture, language, idiom, personal point of view and the general consensus of what is right and wrong at the time.

The problem lies in taking scripture literally, especially outside of its original culture.
While God may supersede culture, religion does not.
Fundamentalists believe their scripture not only contains truth, but is the complete and perfected truth - nothing can be better. Therefore, they try to defend antiquated aspects of life that were touted in their scriptures, as they cannot accept that "that was then, this is now" and life moves on. For them to admit that while a particular action was proper then, but is no longer so, in their mind they are admitting that their scripture is not perfect through time. In order for the particular scripture to be acceptable to the fundamentalist, it must contain no error, and that means it must be perfect - not just at one point in time, but through all time.

[d spike]

The problem with this argument is the confusing of two wide concepts: the essence of a religion (and all the world's orthodox religions share the same essence or core), and the cultural aspect of that particular religion.

This confusion is one of the two major reasons why people have problems with religion.
While most orthodox religions agree on their core beliefs (stealing/killing/adultery is wrong, treating others well is an approach to the divine, etc.) you will notice that it is the peripheral matters that people focus on, never the core. It's almost as if some people prefer to clarify the division between the "us" and "them"... and they do! Which brings me to my next point:

The problem lies in taking scripture literally, especially outside of its original culture.
While God may supersede culture, religion does not.
Fundamentalists believe their scripture not only contains truth, but is the complete and perfected truth - nothing can be better.

Fundamentalists NEED to believe that they alone are right... and thus, all others are wrong. This belief stems from their accepting their scripture as being the Truth - wholly, most perfect and SOLELY. That way, their scripture can never be wrong. The downside to this is that all other scriptures are in error - if they too were not, then that would mean Truth could exist outside their scripture, meaning that their own was lacking in some regard, or that another way outside their own could exist.
This problem is the other major reason why people have problems with religion.

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

The problem lies in taking scripture literally, especially outside of its original culture.

regarding the first part, there would be a huge grey area about what to take literally and what to take as metaphor.

If you don't think the 6000 years age of the earth is true then should lent really be exactly 40 days?

Regarding the second part, human traditions steeped in culture may have more to do with anthropology than theology.

seems you are supporting MG Man's arguments on this point.

[MG Man]

Mg man there is no scientific evidence of the world poped into existence only theories , share your evidence if so.

And also what about the bad people who killing etc and stealing? They will just die and thats it? so therefore this world is unjust people can do as they please and get away when they die?

now we getting to the root of it...........you don't believe in your religion, per-se.........you just need to latch onto anything that will help your human mind come to terms with what you feel will resolve the inequities you perceive in this world........
unjust, my friend, is blowing up buildings housing innocent lives, for the sake of undoing religious injustices and punishing blaspheemers...............

you want to know what's unfuckingfair?????
according to islam (citing islam here only because you seem to be predisposed to that religion since you choose to pull islamic videos), there is a very special place in heaven put aside for prophets and martyrs, ie if you blow up a bunch of people in the name of your religion, you get a better chair at the dinner table............what about the innocent people you kill as collateral damage? They will not share such a preferred place in heaven as your martyr aka suicide bomber......... how fair is that? A honest, kind, decent soul gets blows up for being in the wrong place at the wrong time (let's say a child going to the market to buy fruit), and the zealot who blows him up gets a better place in heaven??????

You worried about the fairness of a godless world, but your very own god has his own twisted and fcuked up version of fairness, which seems not to bother you in the least..........my friend, look at your book before you condemn me for not having one.....

[d spike]

there would be a huge grey area about what to take literally and what to take as metaphor.

It's not so much as "literal vs. metaphor" as what better attitudes can be formed from thinking about what was written. Consider the "Garden of Eden" story: squabbling about whether it really happened, or where it was located, or what sort of fruit it was, will not change anything, nor make the quality of obedience any less or greater.

If you don't think the 6000 years age of the earth is true then should lent really be exactly 40 days?

The fact that some idle folk attempted to unrealistically extract realistic time figures from mythical writings that employed numbers for their mystical qualities rather than their actual quantitative qualities, has nothing to do with a group of Christians deciding to set aside a specific time for contemplation and introspection.

human traditions steeped in culture may have more to do with anthropology than theology.

Quite right. As religion is more to do with man's relationship to what he considers divine, than what scholars consider how the divine interacts with man generally, a man's religion is closely tied up with his culture.
Simply by viewing many of the "pro-religious" posts here, you will realise that most of them contain views that are based more on cultural peculiarities... and few are based on theological principles, and can even be said to be that of a stranger to theology.

seems you are supporting MG Man's arguments on this point.

Only fundamentalists see a religious discussion in terms of "us" vs. "them", rather like a football match. MG Man has raised many a valid point, but the God gang fail to take note of them as they consider him an outsider - thus anything he says is the words of a blasphemer, and must be unheard. Due to this same argument, many a "believer" has come into one of these religious threads, spouted a heap of codswallop, and automatically the God gang shake their tambourines and rattle their sistrums in support and holy fervour... Fanaticism and rational thinking are not bedfellows.

[Seeker]

this thread gettin like a honda goin nowhere fast....

[sMASH]

@brainchild,

have u viewed the video of the people being beaten then burnt for supposedly stealing the potatoes in the african country?

if u have, what do u think of that punishment? was it too harsh, was it justified, or was it too lenient?

[Kasey]

I saw it, and I'm guessing that that was a normal practice there. Where they got that instruction to carry out that punishment from, obviously was a sick source (in my opinion), whether it be their religious scriptures, or tradition. In the small world that I live in, it cannot be justified. In their world, it was. I dont like their world.

[brainchild]

@brainchild,

have u viewed the video of the people being beaten then burnt for supposedly stealing the potatoes in the african country?

if u have, what do u think of that punishment? was it too harsh, was it justified, or was it too lenient?

Once again, (and this is what i attempted to clarify in my last post) I am not questioning the cruelty of human beings to eachother, as this is nothing new. I was simply stating that though the Bible and Koran "teach" mortals how to treat one another, in one breath you hear "love thy neighbor as thyself" and in the other you get a list of guidelines for owning slaves.

For me it's a contradiction and doesn't make sense as a message coming from a deity that created all men equally. As i said before...it was simply food for thought.

Just to clear up...the closest thing to describe my beliefs would be Deism, so while i don't subscribe to any text i do have great appreciation for the wisdom and logic that can be found in all religious text. However, I do come across things that i do not agree with or may not be clear on and utilise this thread to gain some clarity and discuss certain issues.

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

contemplation and introspection.

honestly I haven't seen an iota of this in any of the posts in here from the religious supporters though.

If any contemplation or introspection is done, it was done by the non-religious supporters if only because the religious ones felt they need not contemplate anything since they have their texts which already contain EVERYTHING they need to know, negating the need for any sort of introspection.

or am I missing some implied points?