Christians - A Penny For Your Thoughts.

[Hans Voralberg]

Stewart, the fact of the matter is that you don't understand religion thus can't grasp it.

Ah you show up *no im not trying to offend*. I'd really like to see your pọint of view, can you elaborate ?

[Stewart]

Stewart, the fact of the matter is that you don't understand religion thus can't grasp it.

I can't grasp super strings, 12 dimensional space-time, or indeed anything that Stephen Hawking writes about, but I know who's camp I'm in, and its not the talking snake camp.

[Kezzer]

Stewart, I find your claims really quite childish. You know absolutely nothing about religion yet you sit here and just flame it. You're worse than religious types themselves. I don't sit here and flame atheists, or any religious types, because what's the point? You're not going to get anywhere, you're not learning anything from it apart from "to what extent can I truly aggravate people with my lack of knowledge?".

I find it amusing how all of the non-religious type will flame and flame and flame and for what purpose? To make religious people feel bad? Feel bad about what? Leading righteous lives? Doing what's good? Sure enough, there are bad religious types, and if you want to generalise an entire religion based on some aspects of a specific group of people then that means there's something seriously wrong with your mode of thought.

So who's worse out of all of this? The religious people? Or the non-religious people who will go out of their way to make religious types feel bad? Oh, don't tell me, the religious type because of x, y and z. Most of you have no idea what the Christians of this world are doing FOR the world. 150,000 orphans in China were re-homed last year by a Christian group. Still bad people?

Flame them all you like, but you have no concept of them in any form or shape, and your posts are proof of that.

[misae]

We have small robotic Rovers sending back pictures from the surface of Mars, we have peered into the inner workings of atoms, we know about protons, neutrons and electrons. Quarks are thought to be one of the basic building blocks of matter. We know about Super Massive Black Holes, we can transplant hearts into living humans to replace a damaged or dieseased one.

You are still not negating the existence of God.
In the past our ancestors have accomplished great wonders of the time e.g. the Pyramids.

Indeed humans are capable of much wonder, and destruction but this does not argue against the existence of an ultimate Creator.

What we know of Super Massive Black Holes may turn out to be wrong, and our theories will be adjusted.

All these things we are discovering about the Universe already exist, we are merely observing them and at times using this new information to our advantage.

By the way I do not think the Earth is 6'000 years old. If religion is true then it must offer its proofs and not negate known facts.

And our place in the Universe is truly humbling, but our place on Earth is as masters, guardians and agents. We look after or abuse the planet in a way no other creature does. Is there a reason for this responsibility being given to us? If nature an evolution are the only correct theories why, when there has been enough time, are other species not at the level of intelligence as humans...

[Lee H]

Ahhh religion. Such a powerful topic for sometimes simple minds.

I got suspended from school for 2 weeks due to something that happened in an RE lesson just because someone got onto the topic of god and creation and I pipped in with " for all we know, aliens could of created humans. Think about it, some alien comes down - fiddles with a monkey's DNA and flies off in his ship. Now fast forward a few million years and these same aliens are coming back to see what's happened to their monkeys - Why else do people get 'abducted' and come back with small implants in which cannot be explained"

Oh and just to put the people in the picture, I'm from a catholic family and brought up the usual way i.e dragged out of bed at 10.30 on a Sunday to go singing in a damp, musty building but now I'm from a more scientific approach.

[MadduckUK]

Flame them all you like, but you have no concept of them in any form or shape, and your posts are proof of that.

i thaught your concepts had no form or shape?

[Stewart]

Stewart, I find your claims really quite childish. You know absolutely nothing about religion yet you sit here and just flame it. You're worse than religious types themselves. I don't sit here and flame atheists, or any religious types, because what's the point? You're not going to get anywhere, you're not learning anything from it apart from "to what extent can I truly aggravate people with my lack of knowledge?".

I find it amusing how all of the non-religious type will flame and flame and flame and for what purpose? To make religious people feel bad? Feel bad about what? Leading righteous lives? Doing what's good? Sure enough, there are bad religious types, and if you want to generalise an entire religion based on some aspects of a specific group of people then that means there's something seriously wrong with your mode of thought.

So who's worse out of all of this? The religious people? Or the non-religious people who will go out of their way to make religious types feel bad? Oh, don't tell me, the religious type because of x, y and z. Most of you have no idea what the Christians of this world are doing FOR the world. 150,000 orphans in China were re-homed last year by a Christian group. Still bad people?

Flame them all you like, but you have no concept of them in any form or shape, and your posts are proof of that.

Look - I do not 'grasp' religion, but then, I don't grasp what Stephen Hawking is talking about. I don't grasp what Einstein was talking about. Really, I don't know what the people on Newsnight Review are talking about.

But if I have to choose between the nuclear fusion option for explaining the light around us, or the 'God said let there be light' one, in a heartbeat the choice is obvious.

I will go with the one that offers reason.

If you find my arguments childish than I will attempt to better myself in future, so that I might post something that comes up to your own high standards.

And please stop going on about flaiming, my post was to generate discussion, if you don't like it, don't post.

Cheers.

[htid]

Why does 1 + 1 = 2?

More to the point, how does -1 x -1 = 1 My gf tried explaining it but I still can't understand that stuff!

We have small robotic Rovers sending back pictures from the surface of Mars, we have peered into the inner workings of atoms, we know about protons, neutrons and electrons. Quarks are thought to be one of the basic building blocks of matter. We know about Super Massive Black Holes

Maybe Christians just don't believe this. I mean, we can say they are silly for believing a book, but you believe all that, based on what? What TV says? Have you actually seen and understand any of this evidence first hand? I assume not, so how can you say it 100% is real? Maybe Christians just think that way (I'm not Christian, and I do believe all the stuff Science tells us, i'm just offering what their point of view may be)

Still bad people?

I don't remember reading any of Stewarts posts stating Christians are bad people....

[Stewart]

Maybe Christians just don't believe this. I mean, we can say they are silly for believing a book, but you believe all that, based on what? What TV says? Have you actually seen and understand any of this evidence first hand? I assume not, so how can you say it 100% is real? Maybe Christians just think that way (I'm not Christian, and I do believe all the stuff Science tells us, i'm just offering what their point of view may be)

What is the evidence, first hand, of atoms, electrons and such? We'll, they can be observed, their existence can be proven, you can, via experimentation, show why these things are what they are. They can be understood, rationalised.

Scientists do not have faith that atoms exist, that they are the building blocks of matter, they know this via observation, they offer proof and explanation. They explain why these things are what they are.

God requires faith. Faith is ignorance made a virtue.

Do you believe what can be proven to be true, or what can be believed to be true?

Do you believe that the Earth is 6000 years old because you have the opton of beliving that to be the case, or do you accept that the Earth is billions of years old because this can be proven to be the case?

Proof and reason or blind faith is the choice really. Why would anyone go with the blind faith option?

That was what I was asking in the first post.

[autopilot]

Wow, here we go again. There was a monster of a thread about this just a short while ago.

You cant convince most religious people the god does not exist. People 'want' to believe in god and thus delude themselves. Proof, knowledge and ultimate truth pay no part in their thought process.

You need to do an Alpha course.

Stewart, the fact of the matter is that you don't understand religion thus can't grasp it. That's like me saying someone is a complete arsehole when I don't even know them. For all I know they could be the nicest person on the planet, but I don't know because I don't understand that person.

*waits for flaming from people who know nothing about religion*

Ok, i am not going to flame you. But i will say this - most religious people's knowledge of religion comes solely from the teaching of a completely contrived book, thats been manipulated, changed and re-written for various reasons for hundreds of years, and is full of blatant lies and contradictions.

And quite frankly, if the new testament, and especially the old testament are to be believed - i would have nothing to do with god even if i believed in him. He is a selfish and sadistic lunatic. And he gave up on us long ago, so quit sucking up to him.

Oh, and here is a question for the Christians here - if you were born in a Muslim country, brought up by a Muslim family and never read the bible or left that country- can you honestly say hand on heart that you would have become a Christian within that setting?

It's not that Stewart does not understand religion, he just does not realise the level of delusion and the nature of religious peoples thought process. Its not about common sense, the truth and proof, or whats real at all - it's about an ideal.

If you have not read it, read the God delusion by Richard Dawkins. The man is a genius.

[htid]

What is the evidence, first hand, of atoms, electrons and such? We'll, they can be observed, their existence can be proven, you can, via experimentation, show why these things are what they are. They can be understood, rationalised.

Scientists do not have faith that atoms exist, that they are the building blocks of matter, they know this via observation, they offer proof and explanation. They explain why these things are what they are.

How do you know scientists can prove that? Just because they say so?

Anyway I won't argue my point because I agree with you. Just saying the kinds of point my Muslim friend tells me when I try and understand how he can be like the person you spoke about in the original post.

[Stewart]

Oh, and here is a question for the Christians here - if you were born in a Muslim country, brought up by a Muslim family and never read the bible or left that country- can you honestly say hand on heart that you would have become a Christian within that setting?

Haha. Very good Sir.

Now follow it up with a Bill Hicks quote.

And remember, there is not only one God, there are countless. Why is Odin less valid than the Christian God?

Odin ftw.

Is there any more proof of the Christian God than Vishnu? Or Thor. Or Jimmy Two Shoes, a minor God worshiped only in some parts of West Cuba and Moss Side.

[Stewart]

How do you know scientists can prove that? Just because they say so?

Can you prove that anything you are not looking at now exists? No. Do the rooms in your house exist when you are not in them? You can't prove that they do. Really, we can prove very little, but that does not prevent us from making a rational judgement.

So short of a worldwide atom-based conspiracy to trick us, I will accept that whole atom thing, and will happily do so without actually understanding what an atom is, how it works, and all the other stuff that I'm sure particle physicists are, as we speak, understanding on my behalf.

[htid]

Look, can you prove that anything you are not looking at now exists? No. Do the rooms in your house exist when you are not in them? You can't prove that they do. Really, we can prove very little, but that does not prevent us from making a rational judgement.

Go and tell some religious people that and see how far you get

[autopilot]

Don't know any Bill Hicks sorry, was he that American comic?

Any people become religious for a variety of reasons, but we are genetically predisposed to it. One of the many reasons is because as a species we became very intelligent very quickly. We simply HAD to have an explanation for why the sun came up in the morning and made our crops grow - it just escalated from there. There are lots of other reasons, due to the way the human brain works and the evolution of human society and groups (look up meme theory).

As for your mate thinking that the earth is 6,000 years old (and that the Animal came AFTER humans), he simply HAS to because he is TOLD too and its part of that believe system.

The funny thing is, if any scientific research was found to prove the existence of god - religious peoples view of science would quickly change

Creationism is also partly based on two popular theories;

1) We need religion to prove a moral framework for life. We can be 'good' people from simple nature and evolution - WRONG.

2) Without god we must have came into existence due to chance, and the probability of that happening is too high for any other explanation - WRONG.


Another question for the religious people here - When god got slightly annoyed with a few humans, he made the decision to kill EVERYONE and the all animals. A lucky few managed to survive gods wrath on a boat that somehow managed to be magic and hold 2 of every species (That's MILLIONS AND MILLIONS of animals). This must be true, as it was written by a few people that lived hundreds of years after the event in a different country.

So, please can you explain the moral of this shocking story of genocide based on a whim? And also, what did the animals do wrong?

Another thing, gods cool with interbreeding then, right? Phew, a lot of Welsh people are breathing a sigh of relief! (JOKE!!!)


One last question for the Christians here - can you please explain why the scientists and Atheists wont be allowed into heaven if it hypothetically does exist?

[fat jez]

My personal take on this (and I'm not strongly religious, although I do call myself Christian) is that I do not believe in creation as the Bible tells it. However, I am happy to accept that however many billions of years ago, some supreme being put the steps in place that created the universe and all that exists in it. After all, all it would take is for some slight variations in the laws of physics and we probably wouldn't exist.

Cheers,
Stephen