Here's a new thought... for me as well as (maybe) for you. Perhaps God has the ability to know the future yet does not use it. Why create creatures of free will if you know the future all the time? This is your argument and a great one. Perhaps God denies himself the future because it's more pleasurable to live in the present, he can slip in and out of the "reel of time" but he generally just watches us in real-time.
I don't know, it's very late...
EDIT: By the way, don't leave this thread to die, man, don't think of it like we're both trying to convert each other to our separate beliefs, isntead let us discuss, debate and ENJOY ourselves. I love hearing your thoughts.
EDIT #2: Do you enjoy mine? I love discussions where two people or more can simply discuss without hidden agendas of trying to make someone believe something. Let us determine what we will and then make our own choices on what to believe.
<!--QuoteBegin-Nadagast+Nov 7 2004, 02:26 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Nadagast @ Nov 7 2004, 02:26 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Okay, but HE is to blame because he made us this way, and he still chose to make us this way, KNOWING that we would do whatever we did to **** him off. The blame lies entirely on him. He knew we would do it if he designed us X way... and he still designed us in this way. Again, it's exactly like intentionally shooting yourself in the foot then being mad when it hurts. He KNEW it would happen and he did it anyway, you don't get mad because of that. It's not logical...
Edit: Further, I will be done with this thread unless you wish to open your mind. You see a blatant impossibility in the bible, and you disregard it with the lame copout that only a believer can give. It's like you're standing on top of a building and I just destroyed the foundation, yet the building isn't falling <b>*because you don't want it to fall*</b>. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I see the universe, that in itself seems pretty impossible to me. Just say that something looks impossible doesn't make it impossible, and conversly, many things that people would have called impossible in the past have been proven very possible.
[edit]I have to admit Dark ATi, I wouldn't exactly be disapointed if this thread died either, in all honesty, I have been out of the loop here since page 10. Pretty much since the begining of this thread it has been compleatly off topic, and in all honesty, I didn't start the thread because I wanted to debate the existance of God, I do that far too much already in other threads. Dispite this fact I stuck with it for quite a while, just to keep the topic going so I could get the few honest responses that came through. But when people start preposing that Jesus simply never existed, at that point this leaves the realm of scientific discussion alltogether, and becomes compleatly an issue of phylosiphy. When I go into a thread that is centered on scientific discussion, I take certian things for granted, for instance, I take for granted that anyone arguing that they can't belive in God on a scientific basis, is not going to dispute the validity of the scientific method used to truthify historical documents. And I take for granted that what the entire historical comunity takes as written in stone fact is not up for dispute.
I am not a history professor, why do you expect me to educate you on the proven history of the world to the begining of time? Is it not enough for you that there isn't a single reputable athiest historian that argues against the existance of Jesus or the death of Jesus? You, as an athiest, are compleatly willing to just disregard the existance of Jesus altogether if it can be proven to further your cause, can you not fathom that if it was acctually a historical option, it would have been tried before?
To deny evidence simply because it doesn't 'prove' what you want it to prove is quite simply put, stupid. The ammount of things we have acctually been able to 'prove' is nonexistant, all of out 'proofs' are based on several assumptions. If you assume that God does not exist, it most likely cannot be proved otherwize. There, are you happy? But if I assume that science is lying to me, and that none of the things I precive are acctually real objects, but rather simply a mental progection of my pshyc, that can also not be proved otherwize. Infact I could probably create a set of assumptions to prove pretty much anything, I mean, after all, people belive that aliens exist, people belive that the government is out to get them, people belive that there is a batboy who runs missions for the US military in Iraq. No one's belifes are acctually based in fact, if that were so, then the most intellegent people in the world would all share exactly the same belifes, but they most definately don't.
Make whatever assumptions about reality that you want, don't if you don't intend to tell me what those are, don't throw around words like 'proof' or 'evidence' because you don't have nearly the same concept of those things as I do.[/edit]
Yeah but swift, most threads get shutdown because people aren't behaving, finally a thread that we've been civil in! I love debates and although you may not have created this thread for this purpose I think it serves a great one. For me, anyway.
I think I must have missed something as to where Nadagast recieved his information. I thought we all agreed that Jesus was real, although from what I have read I would lean more towards a small group of people. We were just attempting to discuss if he could be the "son of god" assuming there is one. Again there were two assumptions.
That being said, I wouldn't attempt to belittle his faith Nadagast, that really isn't serving any purpose, and I do respect DarkAtis attempts to be civil, simply because when one attacks ones faith it is hard to stay calm. Even on an "intarweb" forum. :-)
I still want you to prove to me that Jesus was the "son of god" and I am more then willing to continue the debate with you Dark. I don't like having to take a side I don't completely believe in, but I can do it if I must. :-)
<!--QuoteBegin-WoT|Lanfear+Nov 7 2004, 10:03 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (WoT|Lanfear @ Nov 7 2004, 10:03 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I think I must have missed something as to where Nadagast recieved his information. I thought we all agreed that Jesus was real, although from what I have read I would lean more towards a small group of people. We were just attempting to discuss if he could be the "son of god" assuming there is one. Again there were two assumptions.
That being said, I wouldn't attempt to belittle his faith Nadagast, that really isn't serving any purpose, and I do respect DarkAtis attempts to be civil, simply because when one attacks ones faith it is hard to stay calm. Even on an "intarweb" forum. :-)
I still want you to prove to me that Jesus was the "son of god" and I am more then willing to continue the debate with you Dark. I don't like having to take a side I don't completely believe in, but I can do it if I must. :-) <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Indeed, Nadagast has been the one that has come with attacks, I'm simply discussing my own faith and relating to others my own experiences.
I asked my Sunday school teacher who I respect very much about this whole omniscience issue and told him of Nadagast's explanation about shooting yourself in the foot and then being upset when it hurts, he explained it to me like this:
"Yes, God is omniscient and, yes, all the time, that's a part of what omniscience is. He agreed with my statement that God reads the future but does not write your story. While God knows your choice, he doesn't ever force your hand. It is still your choice. I have discussed this with plenty of atheists and they say us Christians don't understand their argument and I say they don't understand my argument. God does not set everything in the universe up. He didn't pick where you would move to when you turned 18, what college you would go to or what color t-shirt you'll wear on Thursday.
He has given us free will and it is ours to do what we will with it."
He also turned Nadagast's statement around into something I like and agree with:
"God is more like the innocent bystander who tells the man about to shoot himself in the foot that it will hurt, the bystander knows he'll do it but his current state is to persuade the man otherwise, once the man does it, exactly like he knew, he is upset at the man's choice and has every right to be, nothing illogical about it."
Atheists put God behind the gun and that simply isn't the case. God judges you, he does not condemn you. You condemn you. That's what most Christians say because that's the truth. I asked this question to an atheist before,
"If you jump off the grand canyon and die, is it your fault or the grand canyon's fault (for being high)?"
Other sources that speak of a Messiah, <b>The Book of Enoch</b>
Understand that the Book of Enoch is not a part of the Bible but a book written by Enoch, the man that never saw death, for God (like Elijah) carried him away into heaven.
God revealed much to him, including bits about the Messiah to come:
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->1 After that period, in the place where I had seen every secret sight, I was snatched up in a whirlwind, and carried off westwards.
2 There my eyes beheld the secrets of heaven, and all which existed on earth; a mountain of iron, a mountain of copper, a mountain of silver, a mountain of gold, a mountain of fluid metal, and a mountain of lead.
3 And I inquired of the angel who went with me, saying, What are these things, which in secret I behold?
4 He said, All these things which you behold shall be for the dominion of the Messiah, that he may command, and be powerful upon earth.
5 And that angel of peace answered me, saying, Wait but a short time, and you shalt understand, and every secret thing shall be revealed to you, which the Lord of spirits has decreed. Those mountains which you have seen, the mountain of iron, the mountain of copper, the mountain of silver, the mountain of gold, the mountain of fluid metal, and the mountain of lead, all these in the presence of the Elect One shall be like a honeycomb before the fire, and like water descending from above upon these mountains; and shall become debilitated before his feet.
6 In those days men shall not be saved by gold and by silver.
7 Nor shall they have it in their power to secure themselves, and to fly.
8 There shall be neither iron for was, nor a coat of mail for the breast.
9 Copper shall be useless; useless also that which neither rusts nor consumes away; and lead shall not be coveted.
10 All these things shall be rejected, and perish from off the earth, when the Elect One shall appear in the presence of the Lord of spirits.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
- Book of Enoch Chapter 51
I present this as a credible source that is not biased, it is not a part of God's Holy word it only attests to it. It says what Jesus said, that the Messiah will be (is) the way, the truth and the life, no one comes to God except through Jesus and that is what Enoch speaks of when he says that bronzes and golds and silvers won't save any man, only his trust and faith in Jesus.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->1 Then I looked and turned myself to another part of the earth, where I beheld a deep valley burning with fire.
2 To this valley they brought monarchs and the mighty.
3 And there my eyes beheld the instruments which they were making, fetters of iron without weight.
4 Then I inquired of the angel of peace, who proceeded with me, saying, For whom are these fetters and instruments prepared?
5 He replied, These are prepared for the host of Azazeel, that they may be delivered over and adjudged to the lowest condemnation; and that their angels may be overwhelmed with hurled stones, as the Lord of spirits has commanded.
6 Michael and Gabriel, Raphael and Phanuel shall be strengthened in that day, and shall then cast them into a furnace of blazing fire, that the Lord of spirits may be avenged of them for their crimes; because they became ministers of Satan, and seduced those who dwell upon earth.
7 In those days shall punishment go forth from the Lord of spirits; and the receptacles of water which are above the heavens shall be opened, and the fountains likewise, which are under the heavens and under the earth.
8 All the waters, which are in the heavens and above them, shall be mixed together.
9 The water which is above heaven shall be the agent;
10 And the water which is under the earth shall be the recipient: and all shall be destroyed who dwell upon earth, and who dwell under the extremities of heaven.
11 By these means shall they understand the iniquity which they have committed on earth: and by these means shall they perish.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And these verses make it sound like Hell is really at the Earth's core.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->6 And when all this was effected, from the fluid mass of fire, and the perturbation which prevailed in that place, there arose a strong smell of sulphur, which became mixed with the waters; and the valley of the angels, who had been guilty of seduction, burned underneath its soil.
7 Through that valley also rivers of fire were flowing, to which those angels shall be condemned, who seduced the inhabitants of the earth.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Wow, definetly gonna go look for a hard copy of this book, perhaps God preserved carnivores after the flood with Leviathan and Behemoth )both Final Fantasy Summoned Creature names BTW <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo--> )?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->6 That day has been prepared for the elect as a day of covenant; and for sinners as a day of inquisition.
7 In that day shall be distributed for food two monsters; a female monster, whose name is Leviathan, dwelling in the depths of the sea, above the springs of waters;
8 And a male monster, whose name is Behemoth; which possesses, moving on his breast, the invisible wilderness.
9 His name was Dendayen in the east of the garden, where the elect and the righteous will dwell; where he received it from my ancestor, who was man, from Adam the first of men, whom the Lord of spirits made.
10 Then I asked of another angel to show me the power of those monsters, how they became separated, how they became separated on the same day, one being in the depths of the sea, and one in the dry desert.
11 And he said, You, son of man, are here desirous of understanding secret things.
12 And the angel of peace, who was with me, said, These two monsters are by the power of God prepared to become food, that the punishment of God may not be in vain.
13 Then shall children be slain with their mothers, and sons with their fathers.
14 And when the punishment of the Lord of spirits shall continue, upon them shall it continue, that the punishment of the Lord of spirits may not take place in vain. After that, judgment shall exist with mercy and longsuffering.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This book is really incredible, why was it omitted from the Bible of today?
WOW! Enoch said there are "Seven Great islands in the Great Sea"...
We have SEVEN CONTINENTS, how would Enoch know this?
This also seems to debunk that the flood split up the earths land mass into todays seven continents...
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->7 Two come from the north to the sea, their waters flowing into the Erythraean sea, on the east. And with respect to the remaining four, they take their course in the cavity of the north, two to their sea, the Erythraean sea, and two are poured into a great sea, where also it is said there is a desert.
8 Seven great islands I saw in the sea and on the earth. Seven in the great sea.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And again, Enoch is right on the money, the Sun gives the moon it's light...
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->12 Uriel likewise showed me another regulation, when light is poured into the moon, how it is poured into it from the sun.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That is actually quite a decent read if you ever get your hands on a full copy. I am afraid though that this is still one of those biases books out there much like the Bible. Even though many of the predictions in this book, (and much like Nostradomus) are very real today, if you read the book in its orginal format, which can not be found do to the fact it was outlawed after Jesus was killed. If I remember correctly. <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> "The materials in I Enoch range in date from 200 B.C.E. to 50 C.E. I Enoch contributes much to intertestamental views of angels, heaven, judgment, resurrection, and the Messiah. This book has left its stamp upon many of the NT writers, especially the author of Revelation." - Craig A. Evans, Noncanonical Writings and New Testament Interpretation, (1992) p. 23 <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I really hate to break it to you DarkAti, but that book is considered to be the christian foundation on which the entire religion is based.
I still need to see evidence that Jesus was the "son of god". <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Believing in God is the same thing as believing in any other form of fancy notion such as Santa Claus. Moreover, there are over three thousand religions claiming that they are the way, the truth, and the life. I would have no doubt that most of the Christians here were born and raised that way thus them being who they are. As for me, I grew up behind a fervent backdrop of religious doctrine: Christianity. And I would call myself some of the few who are able to escape from such things. Elsewise, people raised in this way are oft to remain that way, or cannot escape it at any cost throughout their life. I would leave religion alone, but the thing is that it won't leave me alone. Alas the old adage can be seen clearly?
I would have to ask all the Christians here a simple question if you don't mind. I am not here to attack anyone; to me that is all useless - at the end - unless someone comes up with a properly formed opinion, but since these are forums I wouldn't take into account many of the things said here. The internet is a huge source of information, but I'd rather read something from the library of the brightest minds in history.
Anways, the question is if the belief that God can be evidently felt in presence or in your life's daily walk is nothing more than mere "mind over matter?" I am pretty sure that by being slightly infected with any religious doctrine, if you truly want to believe in it, your mind could hypothetically autosuggest this notion of belief into your head for a shortwhile? This is the case with most self-proclaimed miracle healers.
Honestly, people, the truth is that we cannot prove anything beyond our understanding, so don't even try. Our minds are feeble and to try and explain such things as if Jesus Christ was the son of God, is pride at it's most. The fool only trys to explain that which he has no understanding, and I suppose the fool would also try and deprove something of which he has no understanding or for which there is no explanation.
I don't like posting on discussion forums much anymore. There is so much spitted opinion that it kind of makes me angry. But anyways, I thought I'd post at least one thing in this gigantic thread.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Anways, the question is if the belief that God can be evidently felt in presence or in your life's daily walk is nothing more than mere "mind over matter?"<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Possibly.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Honestly, people, the truth is that we cannot prove anything beyond our understanding, so don't even try. Our minds are feeble and to try and explain such things as if Jesus Christ was the son of God, is pride at it's most. The fool only trys to explain that which he has no understanding, and I suppose the fool would also try and deprove something of which he has no understanding or for which there is no explanation.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If we are going to talk in terms of fools - only a fool would claim that an all powerful supernatural being would be unable to communicate with a people he created and knows inside out. Do you have anything to prove that we cant understand God? This sounds suspiciously like "Man cannot Fly" of 100 odd years ago.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I don't like posting on discussion forums much anymore. There is so much spitted opinion that it kind of makes me angry. But anyways, I thought I'd post at least one thing in this gigantic thread.
Peace to all.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I hate to say it kida - but it sounds like you have a problem with conflicting opinions. What you posted there was pure subjective opinion. You just told me what the "truth" was without providing any grounded logic/proof behind it. You have faith in that "truth" just as Christian's have faith in their God.
The claim that all Christian's are only in it because of their parents is also flawed. Many of the best Christian's I know had it introduced to them, and came from completely secular families. In fact - these people are always those most on fire for God.
EDIT:
Dark ATi, I understand you are no longer trying to convince Nadagast, but there is precious little point to all this. Nadagast has already claimed that he wont listen unless you can provide him with the kind of evidence that he already knows doesnt exist, and couldnt exist, even if the event in question (ressurection) occured.
Came across this while searching around and finding out that Wisconsin is allowing the teaching of creation theory in science courses <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Marine01+Nov 7 2004, 06:01 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Marine01 @ Nov 7 2004, 06:01 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Dark ATi, I understand you are no longer trying to convince Nadagast, but there is precious little point to all this. Nadagast has already claimed that he wont listen unless you can provide him with the kind of evidence that he already knows doesnt exist, and couldnt exist, even if the event in question (ressurection) occured. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> You're making claims that are scientifically unfalsifiable. So I guess we're even?
DarkATi, your explanation of the contradiction makes no sense. I'm sorry but it doesn't. God created us in this way, he knew that if he created us in this way that we would do event X to **** him off, he STILL created us this way, and then get got angry that we actually did event X, when he already KNEW WE WERE GOING TO DO IT.... ARGH. It's a contradiction. You might not like to read it that way, but it is. Blatantly... I don't mean to attack your faith it's just it's plain as day to me how biased you are, it's like you have a blindfold on that only people who aren't Christian can see, that lets you justify in your head these insane, ridiculous explanations.
Hell, Noah's Ark alone should be enough to convince you that it's a load of bs. It's just plain NOT TRUE. It's impossible. There is nothing else to say.
<!--QuoteBegin-xioutlawix+Nov 7 2004, 06:07 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (xioutlawix @ Nov 7 2004, 06:07 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I used to be on fire for arson but now I'm on fire for JESUS!
On a lighter note, found something kinda cute as a side attraction in the form of national enquirer. Made me giggle inside.
Came across this while searching around and finding out that Wisconsin is allowing the teaching of creation theory in science courses <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I liked that <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Not exactly unbiasaed media, but it makes a good point. I compare christians that don't belive in evolution to athiests that don't belive that ever Jesus existed.
<!--QuoteBegin-Nadagast+Nov 8 2004, 11:42 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Nadagast @ Nov 8 2004, 11:42 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Marine01+Nov 7 2004, 06:01 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Marine01 @ Nov 7 2004, 06:01 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Dark ATi, I understand you are no longer trying to convince Nadagast, but there is precious little point to all this. Nadagast has already claimed that he wont listen unless you can provide him with the kind of evidence that he already knows doesnt exist, and couldnt exist, even if the event in question (ressurection) occured. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> You're making claims that are scientifically unfalsifiable. So I guess we're even? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Absolutely. I'm not trying to claim the "rational highground" on you - its just that you've already stated that its impossible to provide you with sufficient proof. Doesnt prove the event happened, nor does it prove it didnt.
Its why the argument is futile, not why "nada r dum"
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Moreover, there are over three thousand religions claiming that they are the way, the truth, and the life. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Interestingly enough, most religions don't claim this.
<b>Islam</b> for example believes that nothing can save you for sure, that Allah has a will of his own and he can deny and or accept whoever he so chooses for whatever reason, he is Allah and does as he wishes. That is why Muslims take trips to Mecca, it is said to increase your chances of getting into heaven.
<b>Buddhists</b> believe that you are continually reincarnated until you achieve "ultimate enlightenment" and then you are sent on to the after life. Enlightenment is achieved through meditation and simply "living right". This, like Islam, offers no real secure way and no real truth at all. Just, do what you feel is right and what enlightens you.
<b>Hinduism</b> differs from Christianity and other Western religions in that it does not have a single founder, a specific theological system, a single system of morality, or a central religious organization. It consists of "thousands of different religious groups that have evolved in India since 1500 BCE." Again, there are no specifics here. Like, bhuddists, hindu followers believe that your soul cycles through bodies (all bodies, including animals if your karma is against you.) until you achieve enlightenment. What the next life holds is not guaranteed anywhere.
I use those three religions because they are the most organized and popular religions that challenge Christian beliefs.
The difference is, God gives us the bottomline unlike any other religion:
"For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that whosoever believeth in him shall not perish but have everlasting life."
<!--QuoteBegin-Marine01+Nov 7 2004, 07:42 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Marine01 @ Nov 7 2004, 07:42 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Nadagast+Nov 8 2004, 11:42 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Nadagast @ Nov 8 2004, 11:42 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Marine01+Nov 7 2004, 06:01 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Marine01 @ Nov 7 2004, 06:01 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Dark ATi, I understand you are no longer trying to convince Nadagast, but there is precious little point to all this. Nadagast has already claimed that he wont listen unless you can provide him with the kind of evidence that he already knows doesnt exist, and couldnt exist, even if the event in question (ressurection) occured. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> You're making claims that are scientifically unfalsifiable. So I guess we're even? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Absolutely. I'm not trying to claim the "rational highground" on you - its just that you've already stated that its impossible to provide you with sufficient proof. Doesnt prove the event happened, nor does it prove it didnt.
Its why the argument is futile, not why "nada r dum" <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> There is no 'Rational highground'. The human brain doesn't work that way, its too complicated to accept fact as fact, it has to presuppose something greater onto it, otherwize we can't understand or define the world around us, because we simply don't know enough about it. Given that this creates the delema of us not acctually being able to understand the universe the way it is in reality, but since it is true to all human beings it is really an irrelevent point. I am going to belive the universe is built in the way I belive it is built, I will openly admit that that is circular logic, and I will openly admit I am wrong, but if you aren't doing the same you are deluding yourself. I base my belifes on the structure that I built to understand the universe, and from the sum of the evidence I have seen, I will declare that there is a God, and that the God is the God of the bible, even if the bible isn't in its nature perfect. It all comes down to a matter of faith, weather you are Christian, Buddist, Hindu, or Athiest, the issue is still faith; you have faith that from the evidence of the world that you have seen, your interpritation of reality is the correct interpretation.
So I encourage people to ask questions, and post evidence, but your concept of a 'rational highground' is a self delusion, so drop that before you come into a discussion, because everyone inately belives they have the 'rational highground' so it is compleatly an irrelevent concept.
You can't prove that you have the rational highground, because your concept of a rational highground comes from the sum of your understanding of the universe, and the sum of your life story in that interpreted universe. It's no more proveable than the existance of God, it takes life experiances to really get.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->It all comes down to a matter of faith, weather you are Christian, Buddist, Hindu, or Athiest, the issue is still faith; you have faith that from the evidence of the world that you have seen, your interpritation of reality is the correct interpretation.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, yes, but you forgot agnosticism. Looking at the world and seeing no proof for the existence of God or the absence of God isn't an act of faith, it's an act of questioning. Sort of scientific inquiry into a question that can't be solved at all using science. Mental masturbation, if you'll accept that.
Of course, if I did the same thing with interpretation of reality I'd end up some sort of a twitchy mass trying to contend possibilities from a Matrix-like system to one where you are all delusions of my psyche. I'll just skip that thank-you-very-much. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Marine01+Nov 7 2004, 07:42 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Marine01 @ Nov 7 2004, 07:42 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> its just that you've already stated that its impossible to provide you with sufficient proof <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> eh.... I don't remember saying that... if I did say it, I didn't mean it <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Frikk+Nov 8 2004, 01:35 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Frikk @ Nov 8 2004, 01:35 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->It all comes down to a matter of faith, weather you are Christian, Buddist, Hindu, or Athiest, the issue is still faith; you have faith that from the evidence of the world that you have seen, your interpritation of reality is the correct interpretation.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, yes, but you forgot agnosticism. Looking at the world and seeing no proof for the existence of God or the absence of God isn't an act of faith, it's an act of questioning. Sort of scientific inquiry into a question that can't be solved at all using science. Mental masturbation, if you'll accept that.
Of course, if I did the same thing with interpretation of reality I'd end up some sort of a twitchy mass trying to contend possibilities from a Matrix-like system to one where you are all delusions of my psyche. I'll just skip that thank-you-very-much. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I'm not trying to be rude, but that doesn't sound like a religion, if we suppose the definition of religion to be: "a system of beliefs". You're saying Agnostics don't know what they believe, therefore I don't see it as a religion or even a belief. If anything it's a state or a passing period in one's life, where they are figuring things out. Saying there is evidence for both "sides" of the story isn't picking a side, it's stating the obvious.
<!--QuoteBegin-Nadagast+Nov 8 2004, 01:39 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Nadagast @ Nov 8 2004, 01:39 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Marine01+Nov 7 2004, 07:42 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Marine01 @ Nov 7 2004, 07:42 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> its just that you've already stated that its impossible to provide you with sufficient proof <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> eh.... I don't remember saying that... if I did say it, I didn't mean it <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Yeah, nad never said that, that I read, anyway.
You just want the entire Bible to make complete sense before you'll believe any of what it says, right?
<!--QuoteBegin-Nadagast+Nov 8 2004, 01:39 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Nadagast @ Nov 8 2004, 01:39 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Marine01+Nov 7 2004, 07:42 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Marine01 @ Nov 7 2004, 07:42 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> its just that you've already stated that its impossible to provide you with sufficient proof <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> eh.... I don't remember saying that... if I did say it, I didn't mean it <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I hate to be the devils advocate in this type of way, because I would honestly prefer to win the argument on rationals evidences alone, so this really comes as somewhat of a low blow...
But why can't you belive in God? and as a seperate question, what would it take to convince you that God exists?
<!--QuoteBegin-Nadagast+Nov 8 2004, 06:39 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Nadagast @ Nov 8 2004, 06:39 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Marine01+Nov 7 2004, 07:42 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Marine01 @ Nov 7 2004, 07:42 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> its just that you've already stated that its impossible to provide you with sufficient proof <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> eh.... I don't remember saying that... if I did say it, I didn't mean it <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I was referring to my previous challenge of: Assuming that the ressurection is true, and you were there at the time, what could you do to collect and present evidence that would acceptable to you 2000 years in the future, using only what was available in the era. The answer I recieved was "Nothing, its impossible to do that - but that doesnt prove the Resurrection is true". And Nadagast is right in saying it isnt proof - but it shows that even if people back then wanted to collect evidence he'd believe, they couldnt. It isnt possible.
moultanoCreator of ns_shiva.Join Date: 2002-12-14Member: 10806Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Gold, NS2 Community Developer, Pistachionauts
<!--QuoteBegin-DarkATi+Nov 8 2004, 02:05 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (DarkATi @ Nov 8 2004, 02:05 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I'm not trying to be rude, but that doesn't sound like a religion, if we suppose the definition of religion to be: "a system of beliefs". You're saying Agnostics don't know what they believe, therefore I don't see it as a religion or even a belief. If anything it's a state or a passing period in one's life, where they are figuring things out. Saying there is evidence for both "sides" of the story isn't picking a side, it's stating the obvious.
~ DarkATi <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> There are some definitions of agnosticism that are a little more formal, and a little more like belief systems. For instance: The belief that the existence or nature of God is unknown and unknowable.
<!--QuoteBegin-Swiftspear+Nov 8 2004, 04:23 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Swiftspear @ Nov 8 2004, 04:23 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I hate to be the devils advocate in this type of way, because I would honestly prefer to win the argument on rationals evidences alone, so this really comes as somewhat of a low blow...
But why can't you belive in God? and as a seperate question, what would it take to convince you that God exists? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I can't speak for Nad, but when it comes down to it, I don't really believe in God. I just <i>don't</i>. Aside from brainwashing, there's not much that I can do about it (not that I really care about the supernatural, anyway. I only ever really think about it when it's brought up in conversation).
It would probably take some sort of "spiritual moment" for me to believe in a deity. Otherwise, it's not important enough in day-to-day life to worry about.
<!--QuoteBegin-Snidely+Nov 8 2004, 06:41 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Snidely @ Nov 8 2004, 06:41 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Swiftspear+Nov 8 2004, 04:23 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Swiftspear @ Nov 8 2004, 04:23 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I hate to be the devils advocate in this type of way, because I would honestly prefer to win the argument on rationals evidences alone, so this really comes as somewhat of a low blow...
But why can't you belive in God? and as a seperate question, what would it take to convince you that God exists? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I can't speak for Nad, but when it comes down to it, I don't really believe in God. I just <i>don't</i>. Aside from brainwashing, there's not much that I can do about it (not that I really care about the supernatural, anyway. I only ever really think about it when it's brought up in conversation).
It would probably take some sort of "spiritual moment" for me to believe in a deity. Otherwise, it's not important enough in day-to-day life to worry about.
*Shrug* <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I'm more or less utterly indifferent to the supernatural as well, same goes for the afterlife, I could honestly care less, I really don't want to live forever so much anyways. Yet I still belive in God... I don't think concern for supernatural issues is a prerequisite for God; God is tied into his creation, and thus God is just as much realisitically important as supernaturally important.
That being said, as a Christian, I don't deny the existance of events that happen that we don't understand the nature of, so called 'supernatural' things, but I am just not concerned terribly with the ramifications of thier existance, other than the fact that they simply prove that our scientific models are not compleate yet.
Ironically I would argue that a 'spiritual moment' is probably one of the most inconcreate reasons to align to a religion, as it has pretty much been scientifically proven that our brains don't need acctual imput from reality to create images that look and feel exactly like reality.
I hope you can get over your apathetic concern for the nature of reality long enough to seek answers one day, but until then, I only really wish you the best.
<!--QuoteBegin-Frikk+Nov 8 2004, 01:35 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Frikk @ Nov 8 2004, 01:35 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->It all comes down to a matter of faith, weather you are Christian, Buddist, Hindu, or Athiest, the issue is still faith; you have faith that from the evidence of the world that you have seen, your interpritation of reality is the correct interpretation.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, yes, but you forgot agnosticism. Looking at the world and seeing no proof for the existence of God or the absence of God isn't an act of faith, it's an act of questioning. Sort of scientific inquiry into a question that can't be solved at all using science. Mental masturbation, if you'll accept that.
Of course, if I did the same thing with interpretation of reality I'd end up some sort of a twitchy mass trying to contend possibilities from a Matrix-like system to one where you are all delusions of my psyche. I'll just skip that thank-you-very-much. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Crap, sorry I missed this Frikk
I would argue in this case that you are absolutly right, but your definition would not be specific to agnostics. Agnosisim is somewhat of a unmolded clay state, although it can form more solid forms. Essentially, any belife is a issue of faith, and all belifes are arrived at via way of the most logical processing of all the input that that particular human is capable of. There inlies the stupidity of Pascals Wager; as a system of logic it is sound, but belifes are never constructed based on threats... They can be physically instilled via punishment, as proven my many psychological experiments, but the human mind is too prone to reverse psychology for any threat, no matter how large, to yeild any greater than 50/50 results, unless the resulting conclusion is predesposed for the participant to agree with. Basicly I'm just saying that if I ever saw someone that Pascal's wager acctually convinced to convert, I would seriosly question alot of the structures that I take for granted at the moment. But really that is neither here nor there. What I really meant to say is that searching for answers about the nature of our existance is a factor outside of faith alltogether, and it shouldn't be at all uncommon to people of any faith, least of all agnostisicm. Questioning and beliving are not nessicarily mutually exclusive events, they just need to follow different topics. As proof, look at the many agnostics out there that simply aren't searching because they don't care. They are in essence a blank slate, yet they do not look to fill that slate. The absence of faith is clearly not the prerequisite for questioning.
<!--QuoteBegin-Swiftspear+Nov 8 2004, 07:05 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Swiftspear @ Nov 8 2004, 07:05 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Ironically I would argue that a 'spiritual moment' is probably one of the most inconcreate reasons to align to a religion, as it has pretty much been scientifically proven that our brains don't need actual imput from reality to create images that look and feel exactly like reality.
I hope you can get over your apathetic concern for the nature of reality long enough to seek answers one day, but until then, I only really wish you the best.
Good luck! <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I realise, on reflection, that "spiritual moments" are associated more with spirit mediums hamming it up. Bad wording on my part. I just mean an epiphany; an experience that changes my world-view. A miracle wouldn't do anything for me. Wow, so a statue's crying blood. <i>Whatever</i>.
<!--QuoteBegin-Frikk+Nov 8 2004, 01:35 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Frikk @ Nov 8 2004, 01:35 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->It all comes down to a matter of faith, weather you are Christian, Buddist, Hindu, or Athiest, the issue is still faith; you have faith that from the evidence of the world that you have seen, your interpritation of reality is the correct interpretation.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, yes, but you forgot agnosticism. Looking at the world and seeing no proof for the existence of God or the absence of God isn't an act of faith, it's an act of questioning. Sort of scientific inquiry into a question that can't be solved at all using science. Mental masturbation, if you'll accept that.
Of course, if I did the same thing with interpretation of reality I'd end up some sort of a twitchy mass trying to contend possibilities from a Matrix-like system to one where you are all delusions of my psyche. I'll just skip that thank-you-very-much. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I think a Big Lebowski quote is due here <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Walter: F--ing Nazi's Dude: There not Nazi's, Walter, they said they were Nhilists! Walter: Well, f-- me! I mean, say what you want about the tenants of socialism..., at least it's an ethos.
Sorry, I digress, but I have always found Big Lebowski quotes somewhat pertanent, and always funny.
Comments
I don't know, it's very late...
EDIT: By the way, don't leave this thread to die, man, don't think of it like we're both trying to convert each other to our separate beliefs, isntead let us discuss, debate and ENJOY ourselves. I love hearing your thoughts.
EDIT #2: Do you enjoy mine? I love discussions where two people or more can simply discuss without hidden agendas of trying to make someone believe something. Let us determine what we will and then make our own choices on what to believe.
~ DarkATi
Edit: Further, I will be done with this thread unless you wish to open your mind. You see a blatant impossibility in the bible, and you disregard it with the lame copout that only a believer can give. It's like you're standing on top of a building and I just destroyed the foundation, yet the building isn't falling <b>*because you don't want it to fall*</b>. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I see the universe, that in itself seems pretty impossible to me. Just say that something looks impossible doesn't make it impossible, and conversly, many things that people would have called impossible in the past have been proven very possible.
[edit]I have to admit Dark ATi, I wouldn't exactly be disapointed if this thread died either, in all honesty, I have been out of the loop here since page 10. Pretty much since the begining of this thread it has been compleatly off topic, and in all honesty, I didn't start the thread because I wanted to debate the existance of God, I do that far too much already in other threads. Dispite this fact I stuck with it for quite a while, just to keep the topic going so I could get the few honest responses that came through. But when people start preposing that Jesus simply never existed, at that point this leaves the realm of scientific discussion alltogether, and becomes compleatly an issue of phylosiphy. When I go into a thread that is centered on scientific discussion, I take certian things for granted, for instance, I take for granted that anyone arguing that they can't belive in God on a scientific basis, is not going to dispute the validity of the scientific method used to truthify historical documents. And I take for granted that what the entire historical comunity takes as written in stone fact is not up for dispute.
I am not a history professor, why do you expect me to educate you on the proven history of the world to the begining of time? Is it not enough for you that there isn't a single reputable athiest historian that argues against the existance of Jesus or the death of Jesus? You, as an athiest, are compleatly willing to just disregard the existance of Jesus altogether if it can be proven to further your cause, can you not fathom that if it was acctually a historical option, it would have been tried before?
To deny evidence simply because it doesn't 'prove' what you want it to prove is quite simply put, stupid. The ammount of things we have acctually been able to 'prove' is nonexistant, all of out 'proofs' are based on several assumptions. If you assume that God does not exist, it most likely cannot be proved otherwize. There, are you happy? But if I assume that science is lying to me, and that none of the things I precive are acctually real objects, but rather simply a mental progection of my pshyc, that can also not be proved otherwize. Infact I could probably create a set of assumptions to prove pretty much anything, I mean, after all, people belive that aliens exist, people belive that the government is out to get them, people belive that there is a batboy who runs missions for the US military in Iraq. No one's belifes are acctually based in fact, if that were so, then the most intellegent people in the world would all share exactly the same belifes, but they most definately don't.
Make whatever assumptions about reality that you want, don't if you don't intend to tell me what those are, don't throw around words like 'proof' or 'evidence' because you don't have nearly the same concept of those things as I do.[/edit]
~ DarkATi
That being said, I wouldn't attempt to belittle his faith Nadagast, that really isn't serving any purpose, and I do respect DarkAtis attempts to be civil, simply because when one attacks ones faith it is hard to stay calm. Even on an "intarweb" forum. :-)
I still want you to prove to me that Jesus was the "son of god" and I am more then willing to continue the debate with you Dark. I don't like having to take a side I don't completely believe in, but I can do it if I must. :-)
That being said, I wouldn't attempt to belittle his faith Nadagast, that really isn't serving any purpose, and I do respect DarkAtis attempts to be civil, simply because when one attacks ones faith it is hard to stay calm. Even on an "intarweb" forum. :-)
I still want you to prove to me that Jesus was the "son of god" and I am more then willing to continue the debate with you Dark. I don't like having to take a side I don't completely believe in, but I can do it if I must. :-) <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Indeed, Nadagast has been the one that has come with attacks, I'm simply discussing my own faith and relating to others my own experiences.
I asked my Sunday school teacher who I respect very much about this whole omniscience issue and told him of Nadagast's explanation about shooting yourself in the foot and then being upset when it hurts, he explained it to me like this:
"Yes, God is omniscient and, yes, all the time, that's a part of what omniscience is. He agreed with my statement that God reads the future but does not write your story. While God knows your choice, he doesn't ever force your hand. It is still your choice. I have discussed this with plenty of atheists and they say us Christians don't understand their argument and I say they don't understand my argument. God does not set everything in the universe up. He didn't pick where you would move to when you turned 18, what college you would go to or what color t-shirt you'll wear on Thursday.
He has given us free will and it is ours to do what we will with it."
He also turned Nadagast's statement around into something I like and agree with:
"God is more like the innocent bystander who tells the man about to shoot himself in the foot that it will hurt, the bystander knows he'll do it but his current state is to persuade the man otherwise, once the man does it, exactly like he knew, he is upset at the man's choice and has every right to be, nothing illogical about it."
Atheists put God behind the gun and that simply isn't the case. God judges you, he does not condemn you. You condemn you. That's what most Christians say because that's the truth. I asked this question to an atheist before,
"If you jump off the grand canyon and die, is it your fault or the grand canyon's fault (for being high)?"
~ DarkATi
Understand that the Book of Enoch is not a part of the Bible but a book written by Enoch, the man that never saw death, for God (like Elijah) carried him away into heaven.
God revealed much to him, including bits about the Messiah to come:
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->1 After that period, in the place where I had seen every secret sight, I was snatched up in a whirlwind, and carried off westwards.
2 There my eyes beheld the secrets of heaven, and all which existed on earth; a mountain of iron, a mountain of copper, a mountain of silver, a mountain of gold, a mountain of fluid metal, and a mountain of lead.
3 And I inquired of the angel who went with me, saying, What are these things, which in secret I behold?
4 He said, All these things which you behold shall be for the dominion of the Messiah, that he may command, and be powerful upon earth.
5 And that angel of peace answered me, saying, Wait but a short time, and you shalt understand, and every secret thing shall be revealed to you, which the Lord of spirits has decreed. Those mountains which you have seen, the mountain of iron, the mountain of copper, the mountain of silver, the mountain of gold, the mountain of fluid metal, and the mountain of lead, all these in the presence of the Elect One shall be like a honeycomb before the fire, and like water descending from above upon these mountains; and shall become debilitated before his feet.
6 In those days men shall not be saved by gold and by silver.
7 Nor shall they have it in their power to secure themselves, and to fly.
8 There shall be neither iron for was, nor a coat of mail for the breast.
9 Copper shall be useless; useless also that which neither rusts nor consumes away; and lead shall not be coveted.
10 All these things shall be rejected, and perish from off the earth, when the Elect One shall appear in the presence of the Lord of spirits.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
- Book of Enoch Chapter 51
I present this as a credible source that is not biased, it is not a part of God's Holy word it only attests to it. It says what Jesus said, that the Messiah will be (is) the way, the truth and the life, no one comes to God except through Jesus and that is what Enoch speaks of when he says that bronzes and golds and silvers won't save any man, only his trust and faith in Jesus.
~ DarkATi
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->1 Then I looked and turned myself to another part of the earth, where I beheld a deep valley burning with fire.
2 To this valley they brought monarchs and the mighty.
3 And there my eyes beheld the instruments which they were making, fetters of iron without weight.
4 Then I inquired of the angel of peace, who proceeded with me, saying, For whom are these fetters and instruments prepared?
5 He replied, These are prepared for the host of Azazeel, that they may be delivered over and adjudged to the lowest condemnation; and that their angels may be overwhelmed with hurled stones, as the Lord of spirits has commanded.
6 Michael and Gabriel, Raphael and Phanuel shall be strengthened in that day, and shall then cast them into a furnace of blazing fire, that the Lord of spirits may be avenged of them for their crimes; because they became ministers of Satan, and seduced those who dwell upon earth.
7 In those days shall punishment go forth from the Lord of spirits; and the receptacles of water which are above the heavens shall be opened, and the fountains likewise, which are under the heavens and under the earth.
8 All the waters, which are in the heavens and above them, shall be mixed together.
9 The water which is above heaven shall be the agent;
10 And the water which is under the earth shall be the recipient: and all shall be destroyed who dwell upon earth, and who dwell under the extremities of heaven.
11 By these means shall they understand the iniquity which they have committed on earth: and by these means shall they perish.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And these verses make it sound like Hell is really at the Earth's core.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->6 And when all this was effected, from the fluid mass of fire, and the perturbation which prevailed in that place, there arose a strong smell of sulphur, which became mixed with the waters; and the valley of the angels, who had been guilty of seduction, burned underneath its soil.
7 Through that valley also rivers of fire were flowing, to which those angels shall be condemned, who seduced the inhabitants of the earth.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Wow, definetly gonna go look for a hard copy of this book, perhaps God preserved carnivores after the flood with Leviathan and Behemoth )both Final Fantasy Summoned Creature names BTW <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo--> )?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->6 That day has been prepared for the elect as a day of covenant; and for sinners as a day of inquisition.
7 In that day shall be distributed for food two monsters; a female monster, whose name is Leviathan, dwelling in the depths of the sea, above the springs of waters;
8 And a male monster, whose name is Behemoth; which possesses, moving on his breast, the invisible wilderness.
9 His name was Dendayen in the east of the garden, where the elect and the righteous will dwell; where he received it from my ancestor, who was man, from Adam the first of men, whom the Lord of spirits made.
10 Then I asked of another angel to show me the power of those monsters, how they became separated, how they became separated on the same day, one being in the depths of the sea, and one in the dry desert.
11 And he said, You, son of man, are here desirous of understanding secret things.
12 And the angel of peace, who was with me, said, These two monsters are by the power of God prepared to become food, that the punishment of God may not be in vain.
13 Then shall children be slain with their mothers, and sons with their fathers.
14 And when the punishment of the Lord of spirits shall continue, upon them shall it continue, that the punishment of the Lord of spirits may not take place in vain. After that, judgment shall exist with mercy and longsuffering.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This book is really incredible, why was it omitted from the Bible of today?
~ DarkATi
We have SEVEN CONTINENTS, how would Enoch know this?
This also seems to debunk that the flood split up the earths land mass into todays seven continents...
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->7 Two come from the north to the sea, their waters flowing into the Erythraean sea, on the east. And with respect to the remaining four, they take their course in the cavity of the north, two to their sea, the Erythraean sea, and two are poured into a great sea, where also it is said there is a desert.
8 Seven great islands I saw in the sea and on the earth. Seven in the great sea.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And again, Enoch is right on the money, the Sun gives the moon it's light...
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->12 Uriel likewise showed me another regulation, when light is poured into the moon, how it is poured into it from the sun.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
~ DarkATi
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
"The materials in I Enoch range in date from 200 B.C.E. to 50 C.E. I Enoch contributes much to intertestamental views of angels, heaven, judgment, resurrection, and the Messiah. This book has left its stamp upon many of the NT writers, especially the author of Revelation."
- Craig A. Evans, Noncanonical Writings and New Testament Interpretation, (1992) p. 23
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I really hate to break it to you DarkAti, but that book is considered to be the christian foundation on which the entire religion is based.
I still need to see evidence that Jesus was the "son of god". <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
I would have to ask all the Christians here a simple question if you don't mind. I am not here to attack anyone; to me that is all useless - at the end - unless someone comes up with a properly formed opinion, but since these are forums I wouldn't take into account many of the things said here. The internet is a huge source of information, but I'd rather read something from the library of the brightest minds in history.
Anways, the question is if the belief that God can be evidently felt in presence or in your life's daily walk is nothing more than mere "mind over matter?" I am pretty sure that by being slightly infected with any religious doctrine, if you truly want to believe in it, your mind could hypothetically autosuggest this notion of belief into your head for a shortwhile? This is the case with most self-proclaimed miracle healers.
Honestly, people, the truth is that we cannot prove anything beyond our understanding, so don't even try. Our minds are feeble and to try and explain such things as if Jesus Christ was the son of God, is pride at it's most. The fool only trys to explain that which he has no understanding, and I suppose the fool would also try and deprove something of which he has no understanding or for which there is no explanation.
I don't like posting on discussion forums much anymore. There is so much spitted opinion that it kind of makes me angry. But anyways, I thought I'd post at least one thing in this gigantic thread.
Peace to all.
Possibly.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Honestly, people, the truth is that we cannot prove anything beyond our understanding, so don't even try. Our minds are feeble and to try and explain such things as if Jesus Christ was the son of God, is pride at it's most. The fool only trys to explain that which he has no understanding, and I suppose the fool would also try and deprove something of which he has no understanding or for which there is no explanation.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If we are going to talk in terms of fools - only a fool would claim that an all powerful supernatural being would be unable to communicate with a people he created and knows inside out. Do you have anything to prove that we cant understand God? This sounds suspiciously like "Man cannot Fly" of 100 odd years ago.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I don't like posting on discussion forums much anymore. There is so much spitted opinion that it kind of makes me angry. But anyways, I thought I'd post at least one thing in this gigantic thread.
Peace to all.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I hate to say it kida - but it sounds like you have a problem with conflicting opinions. What you posted there was pure subjective opinion. You just told me what the "truth" was without providing any grounded logic/proof behind it. You have faith in that "truth" just as Christian's have faith in their God.
The claim that all Christian's are only in it because of their parents is also flawed. Many of the best Christian's I know had it introduced to them, and came from completely secular families. In fact - these people are always those most on fire for God.
EDIT:
Dark ATi, I understand you are no longer trying to convince Nadagast, but there is precious little point to all this. Nadagast has already claimed that he wont listen unless you can provide him with the kind of evidence that he already knows doesnt exist, and couldnt exist, even if the event in question (ressurection) occured.
On a lighter note, found something kinda cute as a side attraction in the form of national enquirer. Made me giggle inside.
<a href='http://www.ironcircus.com/blog/000267.html' target='_blank'>http://www.ironcircus.com/blog/000267.html</a>
Came across this while searching around and finding out that Wisconsin is allowing the teaching of creation theory in science courses <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
You're making claims that are scientifically unfalsifiable. So I guess we're even?
DarkATi, your explanation of the contradiction makes no sense. I'm sorry but it doesn't. God created us in this way, he knew that if he created us in this way that we would do event X to **** him off, he STILL created us this way, and then get got angry that we actually did event X, when he already KNEW WE WERE GOING TO DO IT.... ARGH. It's a contradiction. You might not like to read it that way, but it is. Blatantly...
I don't mean to attack your faith it's just it's plain as day to me how biased you are, it's like you have a blindfold on that only people who aren't Christian can see, that lets you justify in your head these insane, ridiculous explanations.
Hell, Noah's Ark alone should be enough to convince you that it's a load of bs. It's just plain NOT TRUE. It's impossible. There is nothing else to say.
On a lighter note, found something kinda cute as a side attraction in the form of national enquirer. Made me giggle inside.
<a href='http://www.ironcircus.com/blog/000267.html' target='_blank'>http://www.ironcircus.com/blog/000267.html</a>
Came across this while searching around and finding out that Wisconsin is allowing the teaching of creation theory in science courses <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I liked that <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Not exactly unbiasaed media, but it makes a good point. I compare christians that don't belive in evolution to athiests that don't belive that ever Jesus existed.
You're making claims that are scientifically unfalsifiable. So I guess we're even? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Absolutely. I'm not trying to claim the "rational highground" on you - its just that you've already stated that its impossible to provide you with sufficient proof. Doesnt prove the event happened, nor does it prove it didnt.
Its why the argument is futile, not why "nada r dum"
Interestingly enough, most religions don't claim this.
<b>Islam</b> for example believes that nothing can save you for sure, that Allah has a will of his own and he can deny and or accept whoever he so chooses for whatever reason, he is Allah and does as he wishes. That is why Muslims take trips to Mecca, it is said to increase your chances of getting into heaven.
<b>Buddhists</b> believe that you are continually reincarnated until you achieve "ultimate enlightenment" and then you are sent on to the after life. Enlightenment is achieved through meditation and simply "living right". This, like Islam, offers no real secure way and no real truth at all. Just, do what you feel is right and what enlightens you.
<b>Hinduism</b> differs from Christianity and other Western religions in that it does not have a single founder, a specific theological system, a single system of morality, or a central religious organization. It consists of "thousands of different religious groups that have evolved in India since 1500 BCE." Again, there are no specifics here. Like, bhuddists, hindu followers believe that your soul cycles through bodies (all bodies, including animals if your karma is against you.) until you achieve enlightenment. What the next life holds is not guaranteed anywhere.
I use those three religions because they are the most organized and popular religions that challenge Christian beliefs.
The difference is, God gives us the bottomline unlike any other religion:
"For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that whosoever believeth in him shall not perish but have everlasting life."
Straight forward, simple and guaranteed.
~ DarkATi
You're making claims that are scientifically unfalsifiable. So I guess we're even? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Absolutely. I'm not trying to claim the "rational highground" on you - its just that you've already stated that its impossible to provide you with sufficient proof. Doesnt prove the event happened, nor does it prove it didnt.
Its why the argument is futile, not why "nada r dum" <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
There is no 'Rational highground'. The human brain doesn't work that way, its too complicated to accept fact as fact, it has to presuppose something greater onto it, otherwize we can't understand or define the world around us, because we simply don't know enough about it. Given that this creates the delema of us not acctually being able to understand the universe the way it is in reality, but since it is true to all human beings it is really an irrelevent point. I am going to belive the universe is built in the way I belive it is built, I will openly admit that that is circular logic, and I will openly admit I am wrong, but if you aren't doing the same you are deluding yourself. I base my belifes on the structure that I built to understand the universe, and from the sum of the evidence I have seen, I will declare that there is a God, and that the God is the God of the bible, even if the bible isn't in its nature perfect. It all comes down to a matter of faith, weather you are Christian, Buddist, Hindu, or Athiest, the issue is still faith; you have faith that from the evidence of the world that you have seen, your interpritation of reality is the correct interpretation.
So I encourage people to ask questions, and post evidence, but your concept of a 'rational highground' is a self delusion, so drop that before you come into a discussion, because everyone inately belives they have the 'rational highground' so it is compleatly an irrelevent concept.
You can't prove that you have the rational highground, because your concept of a rational highground comes from the sum of your understanding of the universe, and the sum of your life story in that interpreted universe. It's no more proveable than the existance of God, it takes life experiances to really get.
Well, yes, but you forgot agnosticism. Looking at the world and seeing no proof for the existence of God or the absence of God isn't an act of faith, it's an act of questioning. Sort of scientific inquiry into a question that can't be solved at all using science. Mental masturbation, if you'll accept that.
Of course, if I did the same thing with interpretation of reality I'd end up some sort of a twitchy mass trying to contend possibilities from a Matrix-like system to one where you are all delusions of my psyche. I'll just skip that thank-you-very-much. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
eh.... I don't remember saying that... if I did say it, I didn't mean it <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Well, yes, but you forgot agnosticism. Looking at the world and seeing no proof for the existence of God or the absence of God isn't an act of faith, it's an act of questioning. Sort of scientific inquiry into a question that can't be solved at all using science. Mental masturbation, if you'll accept that.
Of course, if I did the same thing with interpretation of reality I'd end up some sort of a twitchy mass trying to contend possibilities from a Matrix-like system to one where you are all delusions of my psyche. I'll just skip that thank-you-very-much. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm not trying to be rude, but that doesn't sound like a religion, if we suppose the definition of religion to be: "a system of beliefs". You're saying Agnostics don't know what they believe, therefore I don't see it as a religion or even a belief. If anything it's a state or a passing period in one's life, where they are figuring things out. Saying there is evidence for both "sides" of the story isn't picking a side, it's stating the obvious.
~ DarkATi
eh.... I don't remember saying that... if I did say it, I didn't mean it <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah, nad never said that, that I read, anyway.
You just want the entire Bible to make complete sense before you'll believe any of what it says, right?
~ DarkATi
eh.... I don't remember saying that... if I did say it, I didn't mean it <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I hate to be the devils advocate in this type of way, because I would honestly prefer to win the argument on rationals evidences alone, so this really comes as somewhat of a low blow...
But why can't you belive in God? and as a seperate question, what would it take to convince you that God exists?
eh.... I don't remember saying that... if I did say it, I didn't mean it <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I was referring to my previous challenge of: Assuming that the ressurection is true, and you were there at the time, what could you do to collect and present evidence that would acceptable to you 2000 years in the future, using only what was available in the era. The answer I recieved was "Nothing, its impossible to do that - but that doesnt prove the Resurrection is true". And Nadagast is right in saying it isnt proof - but it shows that even if people back then wanted to collect evidence he'd believe, they couldnt. It isnt possible.
~ DarkATi <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
There are some definitions of agnosticism that are a little more formal, and a little more like belief systems. For instance:
The belief that the existence or nature of God is unknown and unknowable.
But why can't you belive in God? and as a seperate question, what would it take to convince you that God exists? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I can't speak for Nad, but when it comes down to it, I don't really believe in God. I just <i>don't</i>. Aside from brainwashing, there's not much that I can do about it (not that I really care about the supernatural, anyway. I only ever really think about it when it's brought up in conversation).
It would probably take some sort of "spiritual moment" for me to believe in a deity. Otherwise, it's not important enough in day-to-day life to worry about.
*Shrug*
But why can't you belive in God? and as a seperate question, what would it take to convince you that God exists? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I can't speak for Nad, but when it comes down to it, I don't really believe in God. I just <i>don't</i>. Aside from brainwashing, there's not much that I can do about it (not that I really care about the supernatural, anyway. I only ever really think about it when it's brought up in conversation).
It would probably take some sort of "spiritual moment" for me to believe in a deity. Otherwise, it's not important enough in day-to-day life to worry about.
*Shrug* <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm more or less utterly indifferent to the supernatural as well, same goes for the afterlife, I could honestly care less, I really don't want to live forever so much anyways. Yet I still belive in God... I don't think concern for supernatural issues is a prerequisite for God; God is tied into his creation, and thus God is just as much realisitically important as supernaturally important.
That being said, as a Christian, I don't deny the existance of events that happen that we don't understand the nature of, so called 'supernatural' things, but I am just not concerned terribly with the ramifications of thier existance, other than the fact that they simply prove that our scientific models are not compleate yet.
Ironically I would argue that a 'spiritual moment' is probably one of the most inconcreate reasons to align to a religion, as it has pretty much been scientifically proven that our brains don't need acctual imput from reality to create images that look and feel exactly like reality.
I hope you can get over your apathetic concern for the nature of reality long enough to seek answers one day, but until then, I only really wish you the best.
Good luck!
Well, yes, but you forgot agnosticism. Looking at the world and seeing no proof for the existence of God or the absence of God isn't an act of faith, it's an act of questioning. Sort of scientific inquiry into a question that can't be solved at all using science. Mental masturbation, if you'll accept that.
Of course, if I did the same thing with interpretation of reality I'd end up some sort of a twitchy mass trying to contend possibilities from a Matrix-like system to one where you are all delusions of my psyche. I'll just skip that thank-you-very-much. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Crap, sorry I missed this Frikk
I would argue in this case that you are absolutly right, but your definition would not be specific to agnostics. Agnosisim is somewhat of a unmolded clay state, although it can form more solid forms. Essentially, any belife is a issue of faith, and all belifes are arrived at via way of the most logical processing of all the input that that particular human is capable of. There inlies the stupidity of Pascals Wager; as a system of logic it is sound, but belifes are never constructed based on threats... They can be physically instilled via punishment, as proven my many psychological experiments, but the human mind is too prone to reverse psychology for any threat, no matter how large, to yeild any greater than 50/50 results, unless the resulting conclusion is predesposed for the participant to agree with. Basicly I'm just saying that if I ever saw someone that Pascal's wager acctually convinced to convert, I would seriosly question alot of the structures that I take for granted at the moment. But really that is neither here nor there. What I really meant to say is that searching for answers about the nature of our existance is a factor outside of faith alltogether, and it shouldn't be at all uncommon to people of any faith, least of all agnostisicm. Questioning and beliving are not nessicarily mutually exclusive events, they just need to follow different topics. As proof, look at the many agnostics out there that simply aren't searching because they don't care. They are in essence a blank slate, yet they do not look to fill that slate. The absence of faith is clearly not the prerequisite for questioning.
I hope you can get over your apathetic concern for the nature of reality long enough to seek answers one day, but until then, I only really wish you the best.
Good luck! <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I realise, on reflection, that "spiritual moments" are associated more with spirit mediums hamming it up. Bad wording on my part. I just mean an epiphany; an experience that changes my world-view. A miracle wouldn't do anything for me. Wow, so a statue's crying blood. <i>Whatever</i>.
Thanks for the luck. I'll take all I can get. (:
Well, yes, but you forgot agnosticism. Looking at the world and seeing no proof for the existence of God or the absence of God isn't an act of faith, it's an act of questioning. Sort of scientific inquiry into a question that can't be solved at all using science. Mental masturbation, if you'll accept that.
Of course, if I did the same thing with interpretation of reality I'd end up some sort of a twitchy mass trying to contend possibilities from a Matrix-like system to one where you are all delusions of my psyche. I'll just skip that thank-you-very-much. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think a Big Lebowski quote is due here <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Walter: F--ing Nazi's
Dude: There not Nazi's, Walter, they said they were Nhilists!
Walter: Well, f-- me! I mean, say what you want about the tenants of socialism..., at least it's an ethos.
Sorry, I digress, but I have always found Big Lebowski quotes somewhat pertanent, and always funny.