Proof the Bible is Garbage?

[Foreign]

I disagree with your definition of supernatural. I agree with Lewis' viewpoint on this matter, which explains the natural part of supernatural as something that would happen of its own accord. In other words, something that would be a by-product of the "big show" we know as the world around us is natural, and things that cannot be attributed to a natural occurrence fall into the realm of the supernatural.

The way Lewis explains it (and I agree with his idea) is that nature is like a machine both initiated and maintained by God. His rules apply to this machine, creating an environment we can more or less study and make predictions about. He explains further that miracles (or the "supernatural") can be seen as deliberate intrusions by God into his own creation. These intrusions are represented in the natural world but cause the machine to do something it wouldn't do of its own accord.

[Bioture]

This thread is so fucking useless, You don't have to prove that ur beliefs are correct or not. Who cares, just believe what you want and let others do the same.

This is the smartest thing anyone has ever said in any thread that has ever dealt with faith. Give this man a fucking nobel prize.

There is so much ignorance here that it's starting to make my eyes hurt because I paged through this stupid thread. For the nonbelievers: it's OKAY if you don't believe in anything and not go to heaven. Really - it's fine! Please don't call me a dumbass because I believe that I am. It's pointless to argue what I'm already convicted about, and likewise.

For the believers: will you please shut the fuck up already (i'm saying this in the nicest way possible)? Refer to 1 Corinthians 3:2 thanks. Drop your missionary hats and leave other people alone to their own opinions - it's not up to you but to God who comes to faith. Instead of opening doors to new understandings you're beating a dead horse. Learn when to walk away and be a little meeker and open about what you believe in.

[Chao.]

This is the smartest thing anyone has ever said in any thread that has ever dealt with faith. Give this man a fucking nobel prize.

There is so much ignorance here that it's starting to make my eyes hurt because I paged through this thread.

That's all well and good until creationists try to invade the classroom (they have had a little success with that in the area I grew up in).

[Bioture]

That's all well and good until creationists try to invade the classroom (they have had a little success with that in the area I grew up in).

yeah i edited that part out cuz I just thought about the whole stupid church and state argument

[MetalHeadz]

Mhz you have to realize how pointless that question is, though.

If God exists, there is no way to prove it between one person and another. The argument of His existence surpasses rules of logic and human interpretation of facts because God is considered to be more advanced than we are.

Oh my god, do you know how fed up I am of this pseudo-philosophical bullshit. In the words of Richard Dawkins, an oxford professor, the universe starts off small (as a singularity) and greats bigger and more complex in incremental and gradual steps. The idea that a God created the universe goes against this premise in accorandance to both logical, scientific thought in religious doctrines. The supposition that God exists indeed cannot be disproven, admittedly, but that doesn't mean that the odds of him existing are 50/50. That's a misconception.

If God does exist then why did he create the universe in the only way which makes it appear like he didn't?

[MetalHeadz]

Whatever dude.
His tone was serious. He actually thinks that insulting religion is a bad idea - it wasn't a joke. You are a joke.

Actually no, his tone was threatening. He inferred that if we argued against or criticised a religious person in real life then we would be attacked!

*their
And we're all in awe of your gall.

You honestly came here to pick me up on my grammar?

If he were Bible-bashing then you wouldn't have a problem with him.

No, no I would.

I'm not going to get into a cultural argument but let's just say, because I'm sure 90% of the people on these forums can agree with me, that calling largely Islamic nations "backward fucks" says more about you than it does about those countries - that you're ignorant.

The word "fucks" was perhaps a little strong, but backwards? You call countries who support the death penalty, patriarchy, racism, homophobia democratic and civilised? I that that says more about you, boy.

*you're
Stigmatizing is misused - you mean something along the lines of "pigeonholing." But I guess you knew that since you're "better read."

Again, enough with the grammar corrections - I was pretty stoned when writing that if you must know. Stigmatising is not incorrect there either, you fuckin' MhZ warned for racism - face

Who says you have to have "unwarranted respect" for religion? You clearly don't and nobody cares because your opinion is worth less than 70 year old prostitute.

Nobody said I had unwarranted respect for religion. I don't. In my opinion, people grant way too much respect for religious belief just because it's a belief system which happens to have been around for a long time and gained popularity. This doesn't make it exempt from criticism in my opinion - today there's a taboo about talking out about religious belief: if you haven't recognised this stop breathing because your not worth my time.

Yeah, great idea. I can imagine the bill now:
"Being that Metal Headz has come up with this brilliant idea, and being that there are a lot of religious people, it is resolved that religious criticism is 'widely acceptable' - meaning not only that you have to listen to retards spouting their anti-religious bullshit but you also have to come up with your own anti-religious bullshit despite your actual opinion. It is resolved that this is the only exception to 'freedom of speech,' which President Metal Headz clearly respects to the utmost degree."

As you set a note of linguistic criticism 'Being that Metal Headz', what? Lol. 'Seeing that Metal...'?
You actually make a good point here though, granted. Legislatively it would be very problematic to enforce such regulation, I suppose it's got to be a societal movement rather than a political.

I don't know about the guy you're responding to, but you most certainly aren't "better read" (I guess you mean more well-read) than any significant portion of the population. When people call you out on being an idiot over and over it usually means that you are one.

I didn't mean 'more well read' - that's grammatically incorrect. 'Better read' is acceptable, but you probably haven't come across this term before so I'll let it lie.

I'll list the books I've read on the subject after, I've gtg now.

[winipcfg]

Metal, no one cares what you think. If you're honestly trying to convince someone to change their religious beliefs on this forum, you're an idiot.

And if you're also trying to have a scientific discussion about God, you're still an idiot.

[Foreign]

Oh my god, do you know how fed up I am of this pseudo-philosophical bullshit. In the words of Richard Dawkins, an oxford professor, the universe starts off small (as a singularity) and greats bigger and more complex in incremental and gradual steps. The idea that a God created the universe goes against this premise in accorandance to both logical, scientific thought in religious doctrines. The supposition that God exists indeed cannot be disproven, admittedly, but that doesn't mean that the odds of him existing are 50/50. That's a misconception.

If God does exist then why did he create the universe in the only way which makes it appear like he didn't?

I guess I have to answer you question with another question. Why would God create the universe in a way so that it would take absolutely no faith or risk to believe in him (especially since the times His involvement in our history has been more pronounced people have been more blind to Him than ever)? The point I am trying to make is the same as others have stated in this thread. When it comes to personal beliefs, the odds go out the window. As unlikely as a creator God may seem, if one believes in it, nobody can tell him otherwise. So it's pointless to reason.

On a side note, I find it remarkable how you quote your oxford professors as if they can't be wrong without acknowledging the fact that many distinguished scientists throughout the ages have felt our universe points toward the existence of God, not away from it. I also find it remarkable that the only response to my posts I can expect from you is not in appeal to my reason, but instead an attack on my tactics (in other words, the way I believe). You aren't here to make progress in the direction of your viewpoint. You're just here to make yourself look good and belittle anyone in your way. That only serves to strengthen my own beliefs, so thanks.

[Kolar]

Just putting things into perspective: Dawkins is an evolutionary biologist and has contributed much to the scientific community and the educational system. The personal spiritual or theological opinions of a single scientist or any scientist really doesn't matter. I think most are agnostic, atheist or at the very least believe in a creator deity which does not interfere with our natural world and some do follow a religion. What actually matters are the theories, facts and tools at our disposal and none of it points in that direction. Evolution is not a controversial subject in the scientific community, groups like the Discovery Institute would like people to think so.

Edit: The documentary called Nova Intelligent Design on Trial done by PBS is very informative on the subject, it also talks about the Dover issue and trail. Should be up on EZTV (google name for link).

[HeavenSent]

Anunnaki = Sons of Adam = Heavenly children:

1 http://www.youtube.com/v/rIWQywTZIls&rel=1
2 http://www.youtube.com/v/BU__zoUOTGg&rel=1
3 http://www.youtube.com/v/JMmFFfS5XxU&rel=1

The Bible is telling the same story over and over and over again:

1 http://www.youtube.com/v/8YhubdKvMjE&rel=1
2 http://www.youtube.com/v/yM8_l-eU3RU&rel=1
3 http://www.youtube.com/v/wQrmAbpSndg&rel=1

As it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be at the Lord's return.

[MetalHeadz]

Metal, no one cares what you think. If you're honestly trying to convince someone to change their religious beliefs on this forum, you're an idiot.

And if you're also trying to have a scientific discussion about God, you're still an idiot.

I'm not trying to convince anyone. I'm giving my opinion, it's called a forum mate: where people give different opinions....sorry if I didn't possess the same opinion as you, genuinely. I hope one day that you forgive me.

[Blueblaze]

I easily understand why most theists would argue over this subject, as generally most religions have some type of end time, judgement for life, etc.. but what makes atheist so passionate to defend their beliefs? If there is no supernatural or after-life, then genuine atheists should be able to sit back in comfort and spend their time arguing something that has valid importance to them.

[Kolar]

I easily understand why most theists would argue over this subject, as generally most religions have some type of end time, judgment for life, etc.. but what makes atheist so passionate to defend their beliefs? If there is no supernatural or after-life, then genuine atheists should be able to sit back in comfort and spend their time arguing something that has valid importance to them.

I think my point was that if you oversimplify a person's beliefs then you will likely lead to a misunderstanding with them. While you could peg me as an atheist because I do not believe in any God I know that our understanding of the universe is extremely limited, so believing in something or not doesn't seem important to me. I think you will find the same with anyone, it's all shades of gray.

Edit: People are just generally passionate about their beliefs. I guess it's the same personalty type, an asshole religious person thinks they're doing good by trying to convert people and that sometimes includes belittling the opinions and thoughts of others. An asshole atheist thinks they're doing good by trying to convince you you're following something foolish and that often includes the same treatment. And the perceived anonymity of the internet explains the rest.

[Blueblaze]

Edit: People are just generally passionate about their beliefs. I guess it's the same personalty type, an asshole religious person thinks they're doing good by trying to convert people and that sometimes includes belittling the opinions and thoughts of others. An asshole atheist thinks they're doing good by trying to convince you you're following something foolish and that often includes the same treatment. And the perceived anonymity of the internet explains the rest.

Well put, for me it is quite educational to examine the methods people, and myself, use when justifying their beliefs. It is sad to see that many people, myself included, have ill thought out or poorly articulated explanations and methodology for their arguments. Even so, I really doubt an online forum of any caliber is the right place to do it.

[genocidal]

In answer to everyone else: yes I'm this bored.

Actually no, his tone was threatening. He inferred that if we argued against or criticised a religious person in real life then we would be attacked!

He wasn't threatening you, he was saying stating his opinion about bashing religion. If he were threatening you he would have said something like this:

That's funny because you'd be the 1st on my list.

Thank God that I have God, otherwise I'd be on a plane right now to find you.:shuriken:

You honestly came here to pick me up on my grammar?

Not specifically, but it is irritating.

No, no I would.

Why? You don't like religious people and you think they are ignorant. If someone is making fun of the Bible then you would agree with them. I don't like putting words into your mouth but I'm just going on what you've been saying about Christians and Muslims.

The word "fucks" was perhaps a little strong, but backwards? You call countries who support the death penalty, patriarchy, racism, homophobia democratic and civilised? I that that says more about you, boy.

The words "fuck" was strong? Jesus, man. Calling people "backward" is at best exceptionalist but in this case just ignorant. Again, I don't want to get into a cultural argument but here is a good Bible lesson for you (and you don't even have to believe in God or the Bible to abide by it!):

But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her."

Again, enough with the grammar corrections - I was pretty stoned when writing that if you must know.

Well if you are so well read then you shouldn't be making obvious mistakes like this. They are an eye-sore.

Stigmatising is not incorrect there either, you fuckin' nice guy

Yes, stigmazing is used improperly. Look it up.

Also, cool dude?" Here is a quote from you about "backward" people.

The word "fucks" was perhaps a little strong, but backwards? You call countries who support the death penalty, patriarchy, racism, homophobia democratic and civilised? I that that says more about you, boy.

You are racist and yet you believe backwards people are racist. Does that mean you're backwards as well?[/Rhetorical Question]

Nobody said I had unwarranted respect for religion.

Jesus Christ you're an idiot. I know you hate religion. I used the plural "you" to make a point about your retarded statement that everyone has to have "unwarranted respect" for religion. Nobody is making you respect religion, and subsequently you don't.

I don't.

Everyone knows.

In my opinion, people grant way too much respect for religious belief just because it's a belief system which happens to have been around for a long time and gained popularity. This doesn't make it exempt from criticism in my opinion - today there's a taboo about talking out about religious belief: if you haven't recognised this stop breathing because your not worth my time.

I think you're confusing an invented taboo in your mind with people calling you on the stupid shit you spout to them about your ideas of correlations of Atheism with intelligence (I mean seriously, how does someone say something this stupid?). I don't know about your country but America is made up probably of only about 20% of religious people. Most people may identify as Christians and may go to church once in a while but definitely aren't the type of people you're making them out to be.

As you set a note of linguistic criticism 'Being that Metal Headz', what? Lol. 'Seeing that Metal...'?

I did not "set a note of linguistic criticism." I was making up a mock law based on your contradictory viewpoints to make a point, which obviously went over your head.

You actually make a good point here though, granted. Legislatively it would be very problematic to enforce such regulation, I suppose it's got to be a societal movement rather than a political.

Okay you kind of got my point.

I didn't mean 'more well read' - that's grammatically incorrect. 'Better read' is acceptable, but you probably haven't come across this term before so I'll let it lie.

Lol?

I'll list the books I've read on the subject after, I've gtg now.

I don't care and no one else does.