Example of lunacy that shows that "god" isn't real (contradictions, eternal)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I wouldn't use the word lie, but since you did, I am.
its not a lie. You bash religion up and down and toss out one or post about how you are not anti-Christian or anti-god then do nothing but talk about how bad/wrong they are for the next generation of post.
look at your post in the atheist forum ... its about how they are wrong ... its funny, if it wasn't so sad.
Saying someone is wrong is very far from saying they shouldn't be able to have a belief.
I've answered it many times...in many ways. You just don't like my answer. https://www.city-data.com/forum/60955534-post1171.html
Yes...I know a lot about all kind of metaphorical and allegorical books and writings that have stories in them that some take as literal and form a viewpoint off of that.
Doesn't matter what theology it is from.
Here comes the answer I've given lots of times that you don't like: I don't care if people believe it...people believe all kinda things that may or may not be true (even biased on science or data that may or may not be accurate) and form a view based upon it.
Plus...everyone has their own "tastes" and preferences. They believe in and prefer all manner of things that I may not prefer or believe...and I prefer and believe all kind of things that others don't
Look at preferences and beliefs as to what people would say, the "best" lifestyle. For example: Some think the most enjoyable thing to do would be to hunt big game....others not only don't think it's the best, they are mortified at the thought of shooting a live animal and "field dressing" it, and think it is a "evil" thing to do.
What music do you believe is the best? What food? What kinda comedy? Sexual preferences...some are repulsed by what others seek.
What difference does it make what "moved" them to feel how they do?
Carson reads scientific information provided by other sources...and either accepts or rejects it. He also reads Theological information...and either accepts or rejects it.
My beliefs and views are very straight forward, and based in the best data we have (that could be wrong or just opinion)...but I don't care what anyone else thinks or believes. As far as their beliefs being a catalyst for "wrongdoing"...if it isn't one thing, it would be another...so I don't care about that either.
The world has lots in it that people consider "bad" or "wrong"...stuff others may think is just great. It doesn't matter what the basis for their views are.
The real problem is people thinking that others are "wrong" or "bad" because they don't think like they do.
Wow. If this is the answer to the question I've been asking you, no wonder I missed it or didn't understand it. You don't care what other people think? What difference does it make what moves people? You mean what moves people to believe what they do?
If we're honestly trying to distill truth from fiction, intelligently and objectively, what causes people to believe what they do makes a difference. A BIG difference. That you don't care helps me understand you in any case, and if you think the problem is people thinking others are "wrong" or "bad" (for whatever their reasons) then again I can't understand you too well.
Judgement along these lines is what helps us to distance ourselves from ignorance and wrong-doing. It's not only important to making progress but necessary! Even if one's feelings are hurt...
Yes, the tiresome argument that X% of the world's people ("including the world's greatest thinkers!") believed something at one point in time... tossed out as if that is evidence, and all the evidence needed... ignores the obvious. That a great many people ("including the world's greatest thinkers!") have been wrong about a great number of things over long periods of history. It is an argument hardly worth refuting, because it is not worth making in the first place.
That observation is then countered with "Well it was Science that got those things wrong" (so there!). Further ignoring that Science (or more accurately, the tools of science as they have been applied over that past few hundred years) is the reason we now know better, and that science is intended to be self-correcting as new information becomes available.
With regard to this particular "something" believed by 9 out of 10, that also ignores the reality that no 2 of those 9 are likely to share an identical picture, understanding or concept of that belief. Which ought to tell us something right there?
Yes. Thank you, and funny don't you think?
Someone who doesn't care what other people think sure does go on about what "85% of everyone that has lived in the past dozen centuries" believes! No matter why though, and never mind all who didn't or don't believe in Jesus. I wonder what percent of all the people who have lived in the past dozen centuries had even heard of Jesus.
Right. What difference does it make what people believe or why?
At least it's nice to finally distill one's opinion down to it's essence. Always tends to help promote better understanding. Not that such an opinion can be considered wrong or bad of course. Can't have that!
Well, what the reality DOES tell us is that people are unique, and people's POV's differ.
If 10 people look at the exact same picture, and are then asked to write down what they see, even while looking at it, you won't get the exact same description from any of them.
But that doesn't mean that any of them are "lying" or that their descriptions are "unreliable".
Having 10 different descriptions of something doesn't mean that "something" doesn't exist.
ETA: It's the same thing with writing. While I was in high school, the class was sometimes asked to read a book and write a book report about it. In one class, we all read the SAME book, and were limited in how many (handwritten) pages the report could be.
The takeaway was that no two reports were alike. Descriptions may have overlapped, but the book had a unique impact on everyone in the class. Some people would pay more attention to certain details, while others completely left those details out.
Not every Christian shares the same beliefs as other Christians.
But then again, not all atheists share the same beliefs about their own atheism, either.
Really?
Say we all look at a picture or painting. Say we all look at the Mona Lisa (since we all have seen that one).
Say we are all asked if we see a woman or something else. Have another look. Do we not all see a woman?
Of the 10 people who look and describe what they see, what if someone sees Jesus instead of a woman?
Sure we may all have different reaction(s) about the "exact same picture," but the one reality that is the picture does not change as a result. You are badly confusing the difference between what we are free to judge subjectively vs reality. There are facts, truth, and there are opinions, beliefs, feelings.
Some opinions, beliefs and feelings are based on facts and truth. Others are not. For all of us to judge as to which is which, but just because someone thinks fool's gold is actually real gold does not mean that person is right. They are wrong regardless the fact they believe it's fool's gold. Their opinion and belief is flawed and can be proven so even if that person doesn't care about the proof or what anyone else thinks.
Wow. If this is the answer to the question I've been asking you, no wonder I missed it or didn't understand it. You don't care what other people think? What difference does it make what moves people? You mean what moves people to believe what they do?
If we're honestly trying to distill truth from fiction, intelligently and objectively, what causes people to believe what they do makes a difference. A BIG difference. That you don't care helps me understand you in any case, and if you think the problem is people thinking others are "wrong" or "bad" (for whatever their reasons) then again I can't understand you too well.
Judgement along these lines is what helps us to distance ourselves from ignorance and wrong-doing. It's not only important to making progress but necessary! Even if one's feelings are hurt...
"Necessary"for what? What "progress"? The progress for destroying the environment or delivering bigger & better bombs on target to lay waste to more people and things?
What is "wrong" is subjective. Many have diametrically opposed views as to what is 'good/right" or "wrong/bad".
"Ignorance" is also a very grey area. Even in science. Take Covid-19 for example: Many equally "lettered and qualified" scientists had/have completely different ideas as to what precautions to take, what medications to use, how to treat it, etc. Each pointing to the others' "Ignorance" or "ignoring the data/science".
I am not about to police anyone else's beliefs, thoughts, or ideas. Depending on where you are, the "jurisdiction" you are in will have laws and regulations that control actions and mete out sanctions for noncompliance.
There is the evidence anyone may need (or not need) in order to believe what they do, and then there is the sort of evidence and proof that the scientific method requires. Needless to say, there can be a vast difference between the two, and again we are all called upon to judge what criteria we require to conclude what we do and/or what others do.
Given all I have read of human history, right up to today, I'd say "thou shall not kill" was never really in vogue. For those of us who feel strongly about that commandment, we simply have our soldiers contend with the issue, so we can feel we are in compliance.
Thank you. I appreciate that you are trying to respect the thread boundaries and I, in turn, am NOT trying to lure you into sinning! Suffice to say that there are many definitions for "god"... and I suspect the interpretation on which you rely would not be recognizable to the majority of that mythical 85% (yet another reason that pointing to them for support in numbers carries little weight). But speaking of mythical, I will say that your views are more thought-provoking than those of the biblical literalists.
What thoughts are provoked?
Beyond what I already have, I best not share mine to keep it civil here...
Actually, the flood is mentioned in pretty much every ancient religious text you can find, and there is actual archeological evidence to suggest that the flood did indeed happen. So yeah...there's that. You don't have to be religious or believe in a creator to realize that often where there is smoke, there is fire. So when you have an event that is recorded in so many ancient texts, there just may be some truth to the story even if it wasn't an event that was a direct judgement from God against humanity.
Also, I always like to ask people who are so against "creationism" just what it is about "evolution" or the "big bang" that they find so much more believable. On one side, you have people who believe in a creator, who built heaven and earth. On the other, you have people who believe that essentially all creation was just a fluke. Chance dictated that all we know would exist. An explosion in space started it all. Also, a "theory" mind you. So yeah, just curious how one picks one fantastical idea over another and simply calls that theory "the truth". I mean, I know how creationists feel about it. They have "faith" in their God. But as for the "big bangers" out there, there's nothing to have faith in. Everything just happened dude, and when we die that's it. That's the gist of it from most non-believers. So what's your take on it all Salty? I myself don't have a damn clue. I grew up Baptist, but now I don't know what I believe. I don't believe we were all created from a super dense dust cloud though. Maybe aliens????
True. There are many facts that can be verified and a great flood is nothing too hard to imagine even without the evidence we have about many a great flood. The problem is when the truth of these matters evolves into myth and folklore for which there is no similar evidence or proof. I'd say that's why I lean toward all we know about evolution vs creationism.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Suffice to say that there are many definitions for "god"... and I suspect the interpretation on which you rely would not be recognizable to the majority of that mythical 85% (yet another reason that pointing to them for support in numbers carries little weight). But speaking of mythical, I will say that your views are more thought-provoking than those of the biblical literalists.
