Support NeoGAF

[Log4Girlz]

"Many orthodox people speak as though it were the business of sceptics to disprove received dogmas rather than of dogmatists to prove them. This is, of course, a mistake. If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time"

More from the wikipedia article which I got from the Flying Spaghetti Link.

 

[cajunator]

Believe in the me that believes in you

Theres a song in there somewhere.

 

[RagnarokX]

Yes, I understand that atheism isn't a religion. Thank you.

Then your question makes no sense. There is empirical proof of factual and logical inconsistencies within and between religions, which reduces the probabilities of any one of them being correct, but nothing empirically increases the probability of any one of them being correct in terms of the supernatural. Science should avoid unnecessary assumptions.

 

[daycru]

"Why can't you keep your atheism to yourself?"
"Because the religious wont allow me to. Because every time I open the paper there's another instance of theocratic encroachment on free society - which I won't put up with; up with which I will not put! I hope that's clear."

Pretty much. When is the last time you saw, "Man, this God shit is fake" on a dollar bill? You see, "In God we Trust" on all of them, yes? If there's a culture war, Team Jesus is the US and atheists are Liberia. Don't sweat us.

 

[Jackson]

The lack of evidence is what calls doubt onto the claim. The greater the claim, the greater the evidence required to support it. If I were to claim that Kim Jong Il was a god, I could look to that countries official documentation supporting claim. But beyond claims and millions of believers, where is the direct evidence? Kim COULD have been a god as millions believe and what a country states is factual, but without empirical evidence, this can be dismissed.

God is a dismiss-able concept. There is no getting around it.

Of course God is a dismissible concept. If God wasn't there wouldn't be people debating God's existence right now. Any religious believer must accept that there will never be direct factual evidence that everyone will completely accept.

If a guy raised another person from the dead and said God did it, people would still call it into doubt. If God showed up tomorrow, some people would say that God is just a really powerful alien.

The core concept of belief is belief. There's no empirical evidence for anything regarding belief. It's simply up to the person to believe as they want. We all do it.

For instance you believe you'll end up wherever/however it is that you'll end up after death. Be it afterlife, nonexistence, pandora... but you don't know. You'll never know. No one knows. You just believe happens what you believe happens. Some many think your belief is absurd, but that lack of evidence doesn't actually make it absurd.

 

[AzureNightmare]

No.

Why? Do you not think very much? Honestly my existence would be much more peaceful and pleasant without athiests challenging my beliefs and telling me I'm wrong even when they know I dont want to hear their oft repeated rhetoric. Its almost as bad as trying to tell a Jehovah's Witness to fuck off.

 

[Korey]

Of course God is a dismissible concept. If God wasn't there wouldn't be people debating God's existence right now. Any religious believer must accept that there will never be direct factual evidence that everyone will completely accept.

If a guy raised another person from the dead and said God did it, people would still call it into doubt. If God showed up tomorrow, some people would say that God is just a really powerful alien.

The core concept of belief is belief. There's no empirical evidence for anything regarding belief. It's simply up to the person to believe as they want. We all do it.

For instance you believe you'll end up wherever/however it is that you'll end up after death. Be it afterlife, nonexistence, pandora... but you don't know. You'll never know. No one knows. You just believe happens what you believe happens. Some many think your belief is absurd, but that lack of evidence doesn't actually make it absurd.

It's only not absurd to you because you're used to it.

I'm gonna guess you probably find scientology absurd.

 

[cajunator]

Personally, I dont give a shit if people believe in God or not.
It doesnt bother me if people want to debate his existence because people debate pretty much everything. There are probably debates over debating.

 

[daycru]

Why? Do you not think very much? Honestly my existence would be much more peaceful and pleasant without athiests challenging my beliefs and telling me I'm wrong even when they know I dont want to hear their oft repeated rhetoric. Its almost as bad as trying to tell a Jehovah's Witness to fuck off.

http://bibleforums.org/

 

[Casp0r]

Here's my proof for Christianity.

Human beings have being around for the good part of 200 000 years. Yet only in the last 2000 years have we witnessed any form of constant progressive growth, enlightenment and change.

Is it any wonder that the most modern, advanced, free, liberal, charitable and progressive countries are predominately Christian based?

Is it any wonder the advent of tolerance, open thinking, science and technology was spear headed by these heavily Christian countries?

The proof behind the religion is not a single set of events, it's not a scientifically measurable level or any kind. It's the functionality of society based around it and Christian societies have undoubtedly worked.

It worked when we needed communities to come together and function.

It worked when we needed towns and villages to be governed and managed.

It worked when faced with threats.

It worked when we needed cities, industries and science.

It's working when we needed to move on into a scientifically progressive state of community, out of all the major religions out there, Christianity has being the most lenient when it comes to evolving beyond the historic layers of rules and morals.

Christian societies have worked.


Islam, well you only need to look at the incredible amount of infighting and aggression they have for each other. The incredibly violent and bloody history. The intolerant and hate filled messages and threats they have to institute onto their followers.

Judaism, too exclusive for any expansion and too closed off it leaves them isolated and feared by the community. It's no wonder they are few of them remaining.

Hinduism, to complex and varied. No core structure and rulings for it to be substantially and unilaterally followed. It's functional, however it hasn't lead it's people into the complete technological enlightenment Christianity has led it's people into.

 

[Log4Girlz]

Of course God is a dismissible concept. If God wasn't there wouldn't be people debating God's existence right now. Any religious believer must accept that there will never be direct factual evidence that everyone will completely accept.

If a guy raised another person from the dead and said God did it, people would still call it into doubt. If God showed up tomorrow, some people would say that God is just a really powerful alien.

The core concept of belief is belief. There's no empirical evidence for anything regarding belief. It's simply up to the person to believe as they want. We all do it.

For instance you believe you'll end up wherever/however it is that you'll end up after death. Be it afterlife, nonexistence, pandora... but you don't know. You'll never know. No one knows. You just believe happens what you believe happens. Some many think your belief is absurd, but that lack of evidence doesn't actually make it absurd.

I disagree. The more specific a claim, the more absurd the idea is if no evidence is provided. All observations of living matter ceasing to function has shown that its constituent parts begin to degrade. I do not "cease to exist", my life functions cease and my molecular structure begins to change. I am just atoms which will most likely be recycled into another animals life cycle, some atoms will simple lay still in the earth, others will float across the ocean and wind up half a world away.

 

[Uchip]

There are probably debates over debating.

thats debatable

Christian societies have worked.

and yet societies before and after christianity have also worked
actually, the least religious countries are the happiest and least corrupt
go figure

 

[Jackson]

It's only not absurd to you because you're used to it.

I'm gonna guess you probably find scientology absurd.

No, it's not absurd because of my beliefs. Just like it is absurd because of your beliefs/non-beliefs.

If Scientologists want to believe Scientology, more power to 'em.

 

[Erigu]

Here's my proof for Christianity. [...]

Forget God: are you for real?

 

[Log4Girlz]

Here's my proof for Christianity.

Human beings have being around for the good part of 200 000 years. Yet only in the last 2000 years have we witnessed any form of constant progressive growth, enlightenment and change.

Is it any wonder that the most modern, advanced, free, liberal, charitable and progressive countries are predominately Christian based?

Is it any wonder the advent of tolerance, open thinking, science and technology was spear headed by these heavily Christian countries?

The proof behind the religion is not a single set of events, it's not a scientifically measurable level or any kind. It's the functionality of society based around it and Christian societies have undoubtedly worked.

It worked when we needed communities to come together and function.

It worked when we needed towns and villages to be governed and managed.

It worked when faced with threats.

It worked when we needed cities, industries and science.

It's working when we needed to move on into a scientifically progressive state of community, out of all the major religions out there, Christianity has being the most lenient when it comes to evolving beyond the historic layers of rules and morals.

Christian societies have worked.


Islam, well you only need to look at the incredible amount of infighting and aggression they have for each other. The incredibly violent and bloody history. The intolerant and hate filled messages and threats they have to institute onto their followers.

Judaism, too exclusive for any expansion and too closed off it leaves them isolated and feared by the community. It's no wonder they are few of them remaining.

Hinduism, to complex and varied. No core structure and rulings for it to be substantially and unilaterally followed. It's functional, however it hasn't lead it's people into the complete technological enlightenment Christianity has led it's people into.

Why isn't Jesus mentioned in the bill of rights, or the constitution?

 

[cajunator]

I disagree. The more specific a claim, the more absurd the idea is if no evidence is provided. All observations of living matter ceasing to function has shown that its constituent parts begin to degrade. I do not "cease to exist", my life functions cease and my molecular structure begins to change. I am just atoms which will most likely be recycled into another animals life cycle, some atoms will simple lay still in the earth, others will float across the ocean and wind up half a world away.

Oh thats such a boring way to think.
When i die Im turning into a hyper- beam of light and im going to race everything all over the universe. I will throw down the fucking gauntlets. AND I WILL WIN.

 

[Log4Girlz]

No, it's not absurd because of my beliefs. Just like it is absurd because of your beliefs/non-beliefs.

If Scientologists want to believe Scientology, more power to 'em.

Where do you draw the line of absurdity? If someone believes honestly and truthfully that stoning a woman for adultery is a right supported by a religious text...would you consider that belief absurd? Of course, it would be considered other things as well, but wouldn't absurd be appropriate as well?

 

[cutmeamango]

Why is it so unlikely and absurd to you that God exists? Is there factual evidence that proves the unlikelihood and absurdity of it?

I personally don't find it absurd at all, but the idea of a creator in any level is one I hold with low probability.
I mean, the idea of higher beings is noticed in nature and it is a reoccuring idea since stone age. It is vastly reported through known civilizations too. As rational animals that are able to craft tools, it sure is a congruent thought.

Why low probability? If a sentient being, what would be its motivation? Is he another universe creation that came to be? And then? Or would galaxies be just mitochondria of a system that works in a infinite scale?
It just reaches a point of rationalization that through mere human observation, it is unlikely.
We just came to be is much easier to grasp and reason.

And for the human representation of deities and its lores are so varied that you either consider all correct in some form, or you hold all skeptically.


---

And this Agnostic/gnostic atheist/theist, is 'modern' and more illustrative of the possibilities.
But the 'Theist - Agnostic - Atheist' is a correct usage too.

 

[Uchip]

No, it's not absurd because of my beliefs. Just like it is absurd because of your beliefs/non-beliefs.

If Scientologists want to believe Scientology, more power to 'em.

what about satanists?

 

[Log4Girlz]

what about satanists?

Like Cajunator? Man he'll believe in anything.

 

[Jackson]

Where do you draw the line of absurdity? If someone believes honestly and truthfully that stoning a woman for adultery is a right supported by a religious text...would you consider that belief absurd? Of course, it would be considered other things as well, but wouldn't absurd be appropriate as well?

Well now we're going beyond God and into specific religious doctrine and cultural ethics/morals. Belief specifically in God is not the same thing. One is a bunch of rules/laws that may or may not be from God, the other is does a "creator/creators" exist.

what about satanists?

What about 'em?

 

[Casp0r]

Forget God: are you for real?

Can you prove me wrong?

Obviously not if you have to resort to pathetic posts of smug short retorts with zero substance or meaning.

Next time try contributing.

Why isn't Jesus mentioned in the bill of rights, or the constitution?

While not completely proficient in American History.

You're talking out your ass if you refuse to accept that the United States of America was not founded, built and populated by predominately Christian people and is still a predominately Christian country.

The lack of mention of Jesus from the constitution is hardly an excuse to exclude the effect Christianity had on the advent on America and it's policies.

 

[Jackson]

Can you prove me wrong?

Obviously not if you have to resort to pathetic posts of smug short retorts with zero substance or meaning.

Next time try contributing.



While not completely proficient in American History.

You're talking out your ass if you refuse to accept that the United States of America was not founded, built and populated by Christians and is still a predominately Christian country.

The lack of mention of Jesus from the constitution is hardly an excuse to exclude the effect Christianity had on the advent on America and it's policies.

Hey! Shhh! You're not helping lol.

 

[terminallyChill]

I'm curious as to how theists justify their deity over a different one. Obviously there are different teachings and so on, but it seems to me as though the evidence for most of them is based on roughly the same principles, so aside from your background, what makes you believe in one religion over another?

sorry if i'm a bit ignorant. I never really had much education on this stuff.

 

[Uchip]

What about 'em?

you're ok with that? what about ritualists? and crazy cultists?
is it ok to believe that stuff too?

and before you say "its ok as long as it doesnt hurt anybody"
thats bullshit. People have been ostracised and abducted in scientology, and christianity has a pretty fucking dark past, and still promotes bigotry and intolerance.

 

[Log4Girlz]

Well now we're going beyond God and into specific religious doctrine and cultural ethics/morals. Belief specifically in God is not the same thing. One is a bunch of rules/laws that may or may not be from God, the other is does a "creator" exist.

But specific religious doctrines, every single one of them make claims that what they believe in are sanctioned by God and are difficult to separate from their concept of a God. But, even if we just discuss the general concept of a grander being, why do we hold it to a higher standard than other similar ideas?

 

[Log4Girlz]

Can you prove me wrong?

Obviously not if you have to resort to pathetic posts of smug short retorts with zero substance or meaning.

Next time try contributing.



While not completely proficient in American History.

You're talking out your ass if you refuse to accept that the United States of America was not founded, built and populated by predominately Christian people and is still a predominately Christian country.

The lack of mention of Jesus from the constitution is hardly an excuse to exclude the effect Christianity had on the advent on America and it's policies.

Why would a country founded by christians not specifically mention christianity and jesus? I want your opinion. What purpose could that possibly serve in your mind.

 

[Jackson]

you're ok with that? what about ritualists? and crazy cultists?
is it ok to believe that stuff too?

and before you say "its ok as long as it doesnt hurt anybody"
thats bullshit. People have been ostracised and abducted in scientology, and christianity has a pretty fucking dark past, and still promotes bigotry and intolerance.

Religion != God.

 

[Mario]

Here's my proof for Christianity.

Hmmmm.

Human beings have being around for the good part of 200 000 years. Yet only in the last 2000 years have we witnessed any form of constant progressive growth, enlightenment and change.

There has been progressive growth for longer than that. You could easily make a case for 4000 or 5000 years, or even further. And more of it had to do with the shift from hunter gathering to farming which prompted societal changes which accelerated knowledge acquisition such as living in larger groups, specialisation, and trading.

The proof behind the religion is not a single set of events, it's not a scientifically measurable level or any kind. It's the functionality of society based around it and Christian societies have undoubtedly worked.

Whether a society has prospered under a particular religion is not any proof of the claims of that religion. It is only evidence that the doctrine of that particular religion allows for a society to prosper.

And a lot more than Christian societies have prospered.

It worked when we needed communities to come together and function.

So did non Christian ancient Chinese systems for example.

It worked when we needed towns and villages to be governed and managed.

So did non Christian ancient Chinese systems for example.

It worked when faced with threats.

So did non Christian ancient Chinese systems for example.

It worked when we needed cities, industries and science.

So did non Christian ancient Chinese systems for example.

It's working when we needed to move on into a scientifically progressive state of community, out of all the major religions out there, Christianity has being the most lenient when it comes to evolving beyond the historic layers of rules and morals.

What about the industrialisation of Japan?

Christian societies have worked.

Not always and not without penalty. For example the Crusades, The Dark Ages, Spanish Inquisition, Salem Witch Trials, Catholic "endorsement" of the Nazis, modern widespread abuse of children by priests...

Islam, well you only need to look at the incredible amount of infighting and aggression they have for each other. The incredibly violent and bloody history. The intolerant and hate filled messages and threats they have to institute onto their followers.

The Westboro Baptist Church are Christians. Also, see above.

Judaism, too exclusive for any expansion and too closed off it leaves them isolated and feared by the community. It's no wonder they are few of them remaining.

I'm not sure Jews being limited in number or discriminated against is something which supports the claims of Christianity.

It's functional, however it hasn't lead it's people into the complete technological enlightenment Christianity has led it's people into.

You seem to be discounting the knowledge and technical advancement brought about by other peoples such as the ancient Greeks, Chinese, and Islam, much of which created a foundation for modern science to be built on.

 

[Raist]

Here's my proof for Christianity.

Human beings have being around for the good part of 200 000 years. Yet only in the last 2000 years have we witnessed any form of constant progressive growth, enlightenment and change.

Which was due to science and not religion at all. Besides, many civilizations did amazing stuff well before christianity or even judaism were born. See China, Egypt.

Is it any wonder that the most modern, advanced, free, liberal, charitable and progressive countries are predominately Christian based?

Is it any wonder the advent of tolerance, open thinking, science and technology was spear headed by these heavily Christian countries?

Most of western Europe is vastly secular and has been for 100+ years. Historically christian, yes, but there's no causative relation there, once again.

snip

Meh. EVEN IF your theory was right (problem is, it's slightly biased and subjective) this wouldn't prove in any way that christianity is correct at all.

 

[LCfiner]

Here's my proof for Christianity.

Human beings have being around for the good part of 200 000 years. Yet only in the last 2000 years have we witnessed any form of constant progressive growth, enlightenment and change.

Is it any wonder that the most modern, advanced, free, liberal, charitable and progressive countries are predominately Christian based?

Is it any wonder the advent of tolerance, open thinking, science and technology was spear headed by these heavily Christian countries?

The proof behind the religion is not a single set of events, it's not a scientifically measurable level or any kind. It's the functionality of society based around it and Christian societies have undoubtedly worked.

It worked when we needed communities to come together and function.

It worked when we needed towns and villages to be governed and managed.

It worked when faced with threats.

It worked when we needed cities, industries and science.

It's working when we needed to move on into a scientifically progressive state of community, out of all the major religions out there, Christianity has being the most lenient when it comes to evolving beyond the historic layers of rules and morals.

Christian societies have worked.


Islam, well you only need to look at the incredible amount of infighting and aggression they have for each other. The incredibly violent and bloody history. The intolerant and hate filled messages and threats they have to institute onto their followers.

Judaism, too exclusive for any expansion and too closed off it leaves them isolated and feared by the community. It's no wonder they are few of them remaining.

Hinduism, to complex and varied. No core structure and rulings for it to be substantially and unilaterally followed. It's functional, however it hasn't lead it's people into the complete technological enlightenment Christianity has led it's people into.

holy shit, I feel sick reading this. I hope this is satire.

 

[Uchip]

Religion != God.

no
you cant pull that one
you said it was ok for people to be scientologists
thats what im questioning

and are you implying that you believe in a completely nondescript god?

 

[Log4Girlz]

Religion != God.

The two are usually pretty strongly linked. Though, I do dismiss them both easily.

 

[Roland Deschain]

There was a Scientology banner at the bottom of this page for me
It must be a sign!

 

[Jackson]

no
you cant pull that one
you said it was ok for people to be scientologists
thats what im questioning

and are you implying that you believe in a completely nondescript god?

But it's true. Religion is obviously not God since so many different religions are completely opposed to each other. So obviously either just one is correct, some are correct, or possibly none are correct.

My point in this argument has been it's OK for people to believe anything they want. Would you rather we all believe the same thing? Who decides that same thing? If we should all believe the same thing then why should those beliefs be solely applied to religion? That's not a world I want to live in.

Nope, I believe in Jesus.

 

[cajunator]

I believe in a thing called love.

 

[Monocle]

It seems like a glob of blood is dropped in a tank full of sharks and it's a feeding frenzy. The sharks want to eat but there's nothing there except them, yet they don't stop.

It's not unusual for people to trade volleys when they're divided on issues they care about. Religion, like sports or politics, is a polarizing subject. Combative discussions can be productive as well as entertaining.

Here's my proof for Christianity.
<snip>

Even if your claims weren't rife with inaccuracies (many of which are offensive in their presumption&#8212;but never mind), none of what you said would support deism, much less any brand of theism. How do you get from "Christianity promotes civilization" to "there is an omnipotent being who answers prayers" or "Jesus was divine"?

"Why can't you keep your atheism to yourself?"
"Because the religious wont allow me to. Because every time I open the paper there's another instance of theocratic encroachment on free society - which I won't put up with; up with which I will not put! I hope that's clear."

Indeed. RIP, Hitch.

 

[Log4Girlz]

But it's true. Religion is obviously not God since so many different religions are completely opposed to each other. So obviously either just one is correct, some are correct, or possibly none are correct.

My point in this argument has been it's OK for people to believe anything they want. Would you rather we all believe the same thing? Who decides that same thing? If we should all believe the same thing then why should those beliefs be solely applied to religion? That's not a world I want to live in.

Nope, I believe in Jesus.

I would prefer everyone to be atheist, but not by force...so it will take a few generations

 

[Uchip]

But it's true. Religion is obviously not God since so many different religions are completely opposed to each other. So obviously either just one is correct, some are correct, or possibly none are correct.

My point in this argument has been it's OK for people to believe anything they want. Would you rather we all believe the same thing? Who decides that same thing? If we should all believe the same thing then why should those beliefs be solely applied to religion? That's not a world I want to live in.

Nope, I believe in Jesus.

id rather beliefs werent a factor, and that people further their understanding through education
why would you not want to live in that world? there is so much more freedom when not chained by a belief like that.

you believe in a poorly documented person that may or may not have existed?
doesnt seem like the best role model to me

 

[Erigu]

Can you prove me wrong?

Once again, I curse Poe's law!

Ah, well. I'll just assume you're for real (but not for long, as it's not a pleasant experience).

I think I'll also stay away from the part where you explain why Christian societies are full of awesome. Not just because of the stench, but because I could just point out the following:
In the end, your "proof for Christianity" (i.e. "evidence for the existence of the christian god", yes?) is that "Christian societies have worked".
And that's it.
Whenever a society "works"? That's because a god is helping. I mean, what else could it be?

... Nah, I don't want to think you're for real.

 

[Korey]

Here's my proof for Christianity.

Human beings have being around for the good part of 200 000 years. Yet only in the last 2000 years have we witnessed any form of constant progressive growth, enlightenment and change.

Is it any wonder that the most modern, advanced, free, liberal, charitable and progressive countries are predominately Christian based?

Is it any wonder the advent of tolerance, open thinking, science and technology was spear headed by these heavily Christian countries?

The proof behind the religion is not a single set of events, it's not a scientifically measurable level or any kind. It's the functionality of society based around it and Christian societies have undoubtedly worked.

It worked when we needed communities to come together and function.

It worked when we needed towns and villages to be governed and managed.

It worked when faced with threats.

It worked when we needed cities, industries and science.

It's working when we needed to move on into a scientifically progressive state of community, out of all the major religions out there, Christianity has being the most lenient when it comes to evolving beyond the historic layers of rules and morals.

Christian societies have worked.


Islam, well you only need to look at the incredible amount of infighting and aggression they have for each other. The incredibly violent and bloody history. The intolerant and hate filled messages and threats they have to institute onto their followers.

Judaism, too exclusive for any expansion and too closed off it leaves them isolated and feared by the community. It's no wonder they are few of them remaining.

Hinduism, to complex and varied. No core structure and rulings for it to be substantially and unilaterally followed. It's functional, however it hasn't lead it's people into the complete technological enlightenment Christianity has led it's people into.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/proof

 

[Sh1ner]

For me Pen Jillette nailed it for me:
Why tolerance is condescending
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IpNRw7snmGM

Also I find it difficult how deist scientists manage to keep their own beliefs from intefering from their work. I feel you got to be bi polar to truly pull that off.

I got a mate who I consider to be the smartest scientist about. Who just happen to tell me a week ago that he is a Chrisitian, I find it fascinating. I got so many questions I want to ask him to try and understand but at the same time try not to alienate him. Hes a cool guy but I want to know so badly.

 

[Log4Girlz]

Let me answer the OP more specifically.

People's beliefs in the divine are deeply entwined with their own sense of worth and delusion of grandeur. Even the most humble of religious people must come to the conclusion that their existence is magical and divine in nature. Despite not having any real evidence to support their beliefs, their own existence is enough proof for them. They place the concept of god on a pedestal and hold double standards for any similar constructs. The concept of god is simply not the same as the beliefs in carebears, or santa claus, or leprechauns no matter how similar their characteristics. Its a form of delusion and willful ignorance.

 

[Casp0r]

Why would a country founded by christians not specifically mention christianity and jesus? I want your opinion. What purpose could that possibly serve in your mind.

You're asking the wrong question here.

Why were Christians able/allowed to leave it out? Hence back to my original point.

It's working when we needed to move on into a scientifically progressive state of community, out of all the major religions out there, Christianity has being the most lenient when it comes to evolving beyond the historic layers of rules and morals.

I refuse to believe many other religions out there would have sat idly by while their new countries bill of rights was written up, specifically omitting them.

There has been progressive growth for longer than that. You could easily make a case for 4000 or 5000 years, or even further. And more of it had to do with the shift from hunter gathering to farming which prompted societal changes which accelerated knowledge acquisition such as living in larger groups, specialisation, and trading.

... and all those huge civilizations from beyond have fallen.

Of course I mention the last 2000 years, Christianity is of course built upon the Judaism, so essentially 'Christianities god' was working through a couple more thousand years before that time too. Only things went a bit haywire and he sent his kid down to set things straight.

Whether a society has prospered under a particular religion is not any proof of the claims of that religion. It is only evidence that the doctrine of that particular religion allows for a society to prosper.

And a lot more than Christian societies have prospered.

They have prospered but not progressed ...

So did non Christian ancient Chinese systems for example.

... and yet the Chinese are racked up with a communist, gated off government that abuses and controls it's people.

Where do you think China would be today if they had not offered a dirt cheap labor to bloating, advanced and progressive Western countries.

So did non Christian ancient Chinese systems for example.
So did non Christian ancient Chinese systems for example.
So did non Christian ancient Chinese systems for example.

Where is this Chinese superpower today? Oh wait ... it's built upon the capitalist nations of Christianity.

China has the man power, the resources and the will to be miles ahead of us today. Yet they are stuck being our glorified slave workers, making our ipods and computers for knock of prices.

What about the industrialisation of Japan?

Who kick started that affair?

Japan had to change their whole countries basic system in order to compete with Western economies.

Not always and not without penalty. For example the Crusades, The Dark Ages, Spanish Inquisition, Salem Witch Trials, Catholic "endorsement" of the Nazis, modern widespread abuse of children by priests...

Really ... catholic priest abuse of children? What has that got to do with any- ...

oh right ... fuck the church and everything its stood for because some priests fiddled some kids

uhu ...

Here is a little phrase which explains the entire workings of the world. You won't like it and perhaps openly refuse to acknowledge it. Hold tight.

Shit happens.

Bad people get into power, power makes people bad. Bad people do bad shit. Happy days.

Guess what though. Christianity endured these atrocities. It survived them, adapted and grew through them. Hence it's still here. Hence these countries didn't die out.

More importantly. These atrocities openly went against the core idealisms of Christianity. So are we suprised we hit a dark ages? Are we surprised multiple atrocities were committed when we strayed from the line? I personally am not.

The Westboro Baptist Church are Christians. Also, see above.

No. No they are not.

Please we are not children here.

I'm not sure Jews being limited in number or discriminated against is something which supports the claims of Christianity.

Judaism = 3000 years old

Christanity = 2000 years old

Judaism = 13.4 million

Christanity = 2200 million

Please explain how Judaism has in anyway been more successful than Christianity. Their core concept failed.

You seem to be discounting the knowledge and technical advancement brought about by other peoples such as the ancient Greeks, Chinese, and Islam, much of which created a foundation for modern science to be built on.

Oh I'm sorry ... did I forget about the Greek superpower?

For the last time. Christianity endures. What was the first thing I mentioned?

Yet only in the last 2000 years have we witnessed any form of constant progressive growth, enlightenment and change.

Constant.

Progressive.

Growth.

Greeks died out.
China fizzled.
Islam commit suicide.

Christianity endured and survived. That is the proof. A working surviving concept.

If the Greek system worked ... why are they not here? If the Chinese system worked? Why are we not slaving in workshops for them? If Islam worked? Why is their greatest achievement, selling something they have the fortune for being located above?

holy shit, I feel sick reading this. I hope this is satire.

It's an extremely broad painting of them but essentially correct.

You cannot deny Islam is not fraught with violence and has resorted to death threats to keep their followers

You cannot deny Judaism is not shrinking, disliked and closed off.

You cannot deny Hinduism is not varied and unstructured.

For me Pen Jillette nailed it for me:
Why tolerance is condescending
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IpNRw7snmGM

Also I find it difficult how deist scientists manage to keep their own beliefs from intefering from their work. I feel you got to be bi polar to truly pull that off.

I got a mate who I consider to be the smartest scientist about. Who just happen to tell me a week ago that he is a Chrisitian, I find it fascinating. I got so many questions I want to ask him to try and understand but at the same time try not to alienate him. Hes a cool guy but I want to know so badly.

It doesn't take a genius to separate out moral stories from fact in the bible. It's truely terrifying that such information as a smart friend being Christian surprises you. Oh what has the interent and media done to Christians ... are they all seen as ignorant morons?

 

[slidewinder]

Never heard of the Age of Enlightenment, huh, Casp0r?

 

[DCKing]

Why is it so unlikely and absurd to you that God exists? Is there factual evidence that proves the unlikelihood and absurdity of it?

First and foremost is that the notion of a god is a likely outcome of a human fallacy that ascribes intention to things observed that have no intention at all. For example, if you ask small children whether they think stalactites and stalagmites are the result of a process of water droplets or because animals are itchy and need something to scratch themselves with, the vast majority of them will answer the latter. It's a basic human instinct to ascribe purpose to these things.

It has become increasingly clear for humanity that there is no such thing as purpose in nature however. Not only do we get over this when we grow older (unfortunately this doesn't happen entirely) but our advances in the understanding of the world has shown us that nature is not good or evil, but in generally indifferent. Things do not happen for a reason, but things happen because they are the consequences of a previous state. This immense indifference the universe has is against the notion of almost any kind of God.

It gets even more ridiculous when you consider that a God somehow cares enough for this entire speck of dust on which life is a logical consequence that he starts caring about one of the species that has emerged whose only distinguishing feature is a larger brain and its qualities. Caring so much that the starts offering stuff like Hell and Heaven and a mental police force that checks such stuff as whether you have sex with the right other organisms. But since not everybody here believes that incredible ridiculous notion, let's not take that into the equation.

A god is often ascribed qualities of defining morality or as a creator of the world. Many people seem to think that a God of the Gaps is an easy explanation, but it is not an explanation at all - if God explains the world or morality, then where did God come from? Furthermore, why should we even contemplate those questions if there are other explanations that do not involve the assumption of an entity that is ascribed qualities akin to magic and omnipotence. Occam's Razor applies here - the explanation that requires the least assumption is the most plausible one.

Casp0r: 10/10. Your trolling made me feel sick inside.

 

[milanbaros]

Constant, progressive growth for 2,000 years.

Casp0r you are in serious need of a history education, stop embarrassing yourself.

 

[Log4Girlz]

You're asking the wrong question here.

Why were Christians able/allowed to leave it out? Hence back to my original point.



I refuse to believe many other religions out there would have sat idly by while their new countries bill of rights was written up, specifically omitting them.



... and all those huge civilizations from beyond have fallen.

Of course I mention the last 2000 years, Christianity is of course built upon the Judaism, so essentially 'Christianities god' was working through a couple more thousand years before that time too. Only things went a bit haywire and he sent his kid down to set things straight.



They have prospered but not progressed ...



... and yet the Chinese are racked up with a communist, gated off government that abuses and controls it's people.

Where do you think China would be today if they had not offered a dirt cheap labor to bloating, advanced and progressive Western countries.



Where is this Chinese superpower today? Oh wait ... it's built upon the capitalist nations of Christianity.

China has the man power, the resources and the will to be miles ahead of us today. Yet they are stuck being our glorified slave workers, making our ipods and computers for knock of prices.



Who kick started that affair?

Japan had to change their whole countries basic system in order to compete with Western economies.



Really ... catholic priest abuse of children? What has that got to do with any- ...

oh right ... fuck the church and everything its stood for because some priests fiddled some kids

uhu ...

Here is a little phrase which explains the entire workings of the world. You won't like it and perhaps openly refuse to acknowledge it. Hold tight.

Shit happens.

Bad people get into power, power makes people bad. Bad people do bad shit. Happy days.

Guess what though. Christianity endured these atrocities. It survived them, adapted and grew through them. Hence it's still here. Hence these countries didn't die out.

More importantly. These atrocities openly went against the core idealisms of Christianity. So are we suprised we hit a dark ages? Are we surprised multiple atrocities were committed when we strayed from the line? I personally am not.



No. No they are not.

Please we are not children here.



Judaism = 3000 years old

Christanity = 2000 years old

Judaism = 13.4 million

Christanity = 2200 million

Please explain how Judaism has in anyway been more successful than Christianity. Their core concept failed.



Oh I'm sorry ... did I forget about the Greek superpower?

For the last time. Christianity endures. What was the first thing I mentioned?



Constant.

Progressive.

Growth.

Greeks died out.
China fizzled.
Islam commit suicide.

Christianity endured and survived. That is the proof. A working surviving concept.

If the Greek system worked ... why are they not here? If the Chinese system worked? Why are we not slaving in workshops for them? If Islam worked? Why is their greatest achievement, selling something they have the fortune for being located above?

I wonder how much of the United States is owned by China...

 

[Monocle]

But it's true. Religion is obviously not God since so many different religions are completely opposed to each other. So obviously either just one is correct, some are correct, or possibly none are correct.

My point in this argument has been it's OK for people to believe anything they want. Would you rather we all believe the same thing? Who decides that same thing? If we should all believe the same thing then why should those beliefs be solely applied to religion? That's not a world I want to live in.

Nope, I believe in Jesus.

Is it not desirable for beliefs to be contoured to reality? Would you really trade truth for diversity? If so, our views can't be reconciled. To me, facts matter. The pursuit of knowledge is more than a preference for one among an infinity of equally authentic ways to relate to the world. People are not entitled to their own facts, and if you believe otherwise, I invite you to wish gravity away and drift to the moon.

 

[Uchip]

Who kick started that affair?

Japan had to change their whole countries basic system in order to compete with Western economies.

so god is a capitalist?
I thought god was against rich people, why would he create an economic system that causes a greater gap between the rich and the poor?

why am I even entertaining your posts