Bill O'Reilly...tell me you can do better than this... you can't be this stupid...

[dame theory]

Originally Posted by AntBanks81

Like it or not, there is one true and living God...some ppl put too much stock into science, there was no explosion or bang that just layed out a universe and put ppl on earth as opposed to the other planets...the books and theories were invented by man

Its so funny to me that all the folks that doubt are the sames ones that had "God Bless America" all over the place after 9/11

If thats what you think the Big Bang is, you don't understand the Big Bang Theory. 
If we put too much stock in science, log off NT, take your clothes with synthetic fibers (prohibited by the bible btw), go in your garage, take an axe, and go live in the woods behind your house for the rest of your life. 

You're oozing ignorance homie. 

 

[dame theory]

Originally Posted by AntBanks81

Like it or not, there is one true and living God...some ppl put too much stock into science, there was no explosion or bang that just layed out a universe and put ppl on earth as opposed to the other planets...the books and theories were invented by man

Its so funny to me that all the folks that doubt are the sames ones that had "God Bless America" all over the place after 9/11

If thats what you think the Big Bang is, you don't understand the Big Bang Theory. 
If we put too much stock in science, log off NT, take your clothes with synthetic fibers (prohibited by the bible btw), go in your garage, take an axe, and go live in the woods behind your house for the rest of your life. 

You're oozing ignorance homie. 

 

[whiterails]

Originally Posted by ToAnotherLevel

I just don't understand the "importance" of condemning someones faith in religion or condemning someones non-belief in religion. That's where my "live and let live" attitude kicks in.

I mean think about, if a person in a position of influence were perpetuating the outright denial and non-acceptance of religion, let's say the president, how would you expect religious individuals to feel? How would you feel? I just think that accepting that others have different beliefs, skin tone, sexual orientation, economic backgrounds, etc. is the best way to go. We're not all 'cut from the same cloth".

SN: the questions I asked are rhetorical, no response is necessary.

It's important to condemn because denying science in the name of religion hampers the advancement of society as a whole.  It's promoting ignorance.
Yes, religious people may be offended by people in power stating facts that are against their beliefs, but who cares? 

Our politicians should deny or be skeptical of evolution and pander to creationist so as to not offend them?  That's ridiculous.

 

[whiterails]

Originally Posted by ToAnotherLevel

I just don't understand the "importance" of condemning someones faith in religion or condemning someones non-belief in religion. That's where my "live and let live" attitude kicks in.

I mean think about, if a person in a position of influence were perpetuating the outright denial and non-acceptance of religion, let's say the president, how would you expect religious individuals to feel? How would you feel? I just think that accepting that others have different beliefs, skin tone, sexual orientation, economic backgrounds, etc. is the best way to go. We're not all 'cut from the same cloth".

SN: the questions I asked are rhetorical, no response is necessary.

It's important to condemn because denying science in the name of religion hampers the advancement of society as a whole.  It's promoting ignorance.
Yes, religious people may be offended by people in power stating facts that are against their beliefs, but who cares? 

Our politicians should deny or be skeptical of evolution and pander to creationist so as to not offend them?  That's ridiculous.

 

[mo matik]

Nice. Just keep using those emoticons. Continue to use sarcasm. Don't even give me enough credit to take me seriously. That's it. Continue to assume I have no idea what I'm talking about. I don't know anything about Aquinas. I don't know anything about evolution. I don't even know anything about Islam. Everyone on the internet and in the world doesn't know as much as you do. 1.4 billion Muslims have all convoluted Islam so it fixes their lives, and you are more intelligent than all of us.

EDIT: There is a difference between the application of Shariah and Shariah law itself.

 

[mo matik]

Nice. Just keep using those emoticons. Continue to use sarcasm. Don't even give me enough credit to take me seriously. That's it. Continue to assume I have no idea what I'm talking about. I don't know anything about Aquinas. I don't know anything about evolution. I don't even know anything about Islam. Everyone on the internet and in the world doesn't know as much as you do. 1.4 billion Muslims have all convoluted Islam so it fixes their lives, and you are more intelligent than all of us.

EDIT: There is a difference between the application of Shariah and Shariah law itself.

 

[dame theory]

Originally Posted by Mo Matik

Nice. Just keep using those emoticons. Continue to use sarcasm. Don't even give me enough credit to take me seriously. That's it. Continue to assume I have no idea what I'm talking about. I don't know anything about Aquinas. I don't know anything about evolution. I don't even know anything about Islam. Everyone on the internet and in the world doesn't know as much as you do. 1.4 billion Muslims have all convoluted Islam so it fixes their lives, and you are more intelligent than all of us.

You may know more about islam than me, sure. You read it every day. I read it occasionally. However you have failed to meet the contradictions of your faith and address the issues with your religion. 
You showed you didn't know anything about Aquinas by saying his views are similar to Islam then when shown an example where he basically rips islam then you say I'm the liar. He might have been influenced by it, i.e. stealing principles...just like they stole principles...and like they did to the people before them and so on... 

Of those 1.4 billion, how many of them live above the poverty line? How many of them are functionally literate? Religion lives on in the ignorance of its people. When most people are worried about what to eat tonight who has time to really understand that religion is at its core faulty? Plus, you're just joining the popularity contest with a phrase like that. So would you be a muslim if 5 people practiced it? Nah, you wanna do what everyone else you know is doing. 

In some areas, I know more than you and in some areas you may know more than me. However, your grasp of comparative religion is miniscule as you've shown. I've addressed in totality each point you've put up and of which none of them stand up to the test of criticism. In arguments that you used (I hope they were your strongest arguments) I exposed several of the existing contradictions there and yet you want to bring up intellect. Go ahead. Take it personally. Hopefully it'll encourage you to ask more about why you do the things you do. You can't justify things half way. Its all or nothing. Especially for someone who is "orthodox." Just tell your wife on your wedding night that you intend to hit her when she disobeys, or your daughter that she can't marry a non-muslim, or your son that you'll kill him if hes gay, or praying to kill your neighbor for telling you merry christmas. Sarcasm is the best tool in the world only because it shows how absurd some things really are. Islam = Christianity = Bull %%%!. 

The ball is in your court. 

 

[dame theory]

Originally Posted by Mo Matik

Nice. Just keep using those emoticons. Continue to use sarcasm. Don't even give me enough credit to take me seriously. That's it. Continue to assume I have no idea what I'm talking about. I don't know anything about Aquinas. I don't know anything about evolution. I don't even know anything about Islam. Everyone on the internet and in the world doesn't know as much as you do. 1.4 billion Muslims have all convoluted Islam so it fixes their lives, and you are more intelligent than all of us.

You may know more about islam than me, sure. You read it every day. I read it occasionally. However you have failed to meet the contradictions of your faith and address the issues with your religion. 
You showed you didn't know anything about Aquinas by saying his views are similar to Islam then when shown an example where he basically rips islam then you say I'm the liar. He might have been influenced by it, i.e. stealing principles...just like they stole principles...and like they did to the people before them and so on... 

Of those 1.4 billion, how many of them live above the poverty line? How many of them are functionally literate? Religion lives on in the ignorance of its people. When most people are worried about what to eat tonight who has time to really understand that religion is at its core faulty? Plus, you're just joining the popularity contest with a phrase like that. So would you be a muslim if 5 people practiced it? Nah, you wanna do what everyone else you know is doing. 

In some areas, I know more than you and in some areas you may know more than me. However, your grasp of comparative religion is miniscule as you've shown. I've addressed in totality each point you've put up and of which none of them stand up to the test of criticism. In arguments that you used (I hope they were your strongest arguments) I exposed several of the existing contradictions there and yet you want to bring up intellect. Go ahead. Take it personally. Hopefully it'll encourage you to ask more about why you do the things you do. You can't justify things half way. Its all or nothing. Especially for someone who is "orthodox." Just tell your wife on your wedding night that you intend to hit her when she disobeys, or your daughter that she can't marry a non-muslim, or your son that you'll kill him if hes gay, or praying to kill your neighbor for telling you merry christmas. Sarcasm is the best tool in the world only because it shows how absurd some things really are. Islam = Christianity = Bull %%%!. 

The ball is in your court. 

 

[atlien seeko]

The only thing with me is... How is it so easy for him to accept the fact that the sun, moon, etc is responsible for tides, etc when these are SCIENTIFIC explainations? At what point do you draw the line in scientific explainations and fall back on religion?

 

[atlien seeko]

The only thing with me is... How is it so easy for him to accept the fact that the sun, moon, etc is responsible for tides, etc when these are SCIENTIFIC explainations? At what point do you draw the line in scientific explainations and fall back on religion?

 

[dame theory]

Originally Posted by ATLien Seeko

The only thing with me is... How is it so easy for him to accept the fact that the sun, moon, etc is responsible for tides, etc when these are SCIENTIFIC explainations? At what point do you draw the line in scientific explainations and fall back on religion?

 

[mo matik]

DUDE I already told you that his views are SIMILAR to Islamic thought. I never said that he was directly influenced by Islam. I knew he had harsh criticisms of Islam, as did 99% of Europe at the time. I took a course on Western Political Philosophy and the Summa Theologica was in the curriculum. The whole 'world is innately unjust' thing is something that is integral to his entire basis for a functioning society.  You know it is.

The 1.4 billion thing wasn't to make it a popularity contest, it was to put things in perspective.  But it flew over your head.  Instead, you picked out what most critics do, the idea of sheep or a follower.  The argument can be made for both theists and atheists.  http://www.huffingtonpost...merican-re_b_814038.html

Whatever contradictions you have picked out you need to research and see for yourself if they are legitimate or not.  We live in a world where all the information you need is available to you as you sit in that chair.  I'm not going to hand deliver any more info to you when you won't take me seriously despite all my attempts to steer you towards scholarship.  I did my best to not enter this discussion.  I knew where it was going before I even began, and yet here we are.

You studied neuroscience and behavioral biology.  Why you still won't concede the significance of thorough research given your background is beyond me.

EDIT:

So this proves what? Aquinas and other religious zealots had similar thoughts? or that religious people like to claim ideas as their own?
All I was doing was attempting to give what I was writing more legitimacy by mentioning a noted philosopher who had similar beliefs. 

 

[mo matik]

DUDE I already told you that his views are SIMILAR to Islamic thought. I never said that he was directly influenced by Islam. I knew he had harsh criticisms of Islam, as did 99% of Europe at the time. I took a course on Western Political Philosophy and the Summa Theologica was in the curriculum. The whole 'world is innately unjust' thing is something that is integral to his entire basis for a functioning society.  You know it is.

The 1.4 billion thing wasn't to make it a popularity contest, it was to put things in perspective.  But it flew over your head.  Instead, you picked out what most critics do, the idea of sheep or a follower.  The argument can be made for both theists and atheists.  http://www.huffingtonpost...merican-re_b_814038.html

Whatever contradictions you have picked out you need to research and see for yourself if they are legitimate or not.  We live in a world where all the information you need is available to you as you sit in that chair.  I'm not going to hand deliver any more info to you when you won't take me seriously despite all my attempts to steer you towards scholarship.  I did my best to not enter this discussion.  I knew where it was going before I even began, and yet here we are.

You studied neuroscience and behavioral biology.  Why you still won't concede the significance of thorough research given your background is beyond me.

EDIT:

So this proves what? Aquinas and other religious zealots had similar thoughts? or that religious people like to claim ideas as their own?
All I was doing was attempting to give what I was writing more legitimacy by mentioning a noted philosopher who had similar beliefs. 

 

[dame theory]

Originally Posted by ATLien Seeko

The only thing with me is... How is it so easy for him to accept the fact that the sun, moon, etc is responsible for tides, etc when these are SCIENTIFIC explainations? At what point do you draw the line in scientific explainations and fall back on religion?

 

[dame theory]

Originally Posted by Mo Matik

DUDE I already told you that his views are SIMILAR to Islamic thought. I never said that he was directly influenced by Islam. I knew he had harsh criticisms of Islam, as did 99% of Europe at the time. I took a course on Western Political Philosophy and the Summa Theologica was in the curriculum. The whole 'world is innately unjust' thing is something that is integral to his entire basis for a functioning society.

So this proves what? Aquinas and other religious zealots had similar thoughts? or that religious people like to claim ideas as their own?

Dame Theory wrote:

---

Mo Matik wrote:
I am not a moderate.  I am as orthodox as you can get.  My faith relies on 2 things: The Qur'an and Hadith.  I've used tons and tons of other sources to properly understand these 2 sources of information.  My point on 'perfection' I think was unclear.  This world, here, is innately unjust.  Why?  For a number of reasons.  Lets shrink it down to a model of a single society.

-You will not always know for certain whether someone is guilty or not.
-There are many 'wrongs' which cannot be corrected.
-Punishments are inaccurate and subject to times.  Plus, there is a limit to punishment in the form of death.  Killing 50 and killing 100 both will get you the death sentence.  But 1 is more wrong than the other.

Islam acknowledges this innate imperfection of this world, and gives us legitimate realistic solutions for dealing with it.  That's what I was getting at.  St. Thomas Aquinas discusses this stuff too.  His philosophy is actually very close to an Islamic model of thought, if you're familiar with him.

Oh crap...you're orthodox? Then you're DEFINITELY deluded. How do you address the inconsistencies in Islam? Ignore them? 

The world IS innately unjust. The universe is indifferent. Humans want to feel special. They want to be loved. Thats why they invoke these fallacies to bear the pain of living life. You need to find a way to add your own purpose to life. ... 

 @ the audacity of using Thomas Aquinas to support Islam. First of all dude was Catholic. Second of all to support him then shows that all religions draw from the same principles that they want to use for their own...i.e. being narcissistic. Third...I don't think you've read much aquinas. A simple search will show you Aquinas openly spoke about the carnality of Mohammed and invoked his disdain for Islams living for the lust of mohammed. So... tell me where he comes in again? 

. Philosophers have struggled with the concepts of morality and judgement for as long as we can remember...thats why its important for these things not to be left up to the religious agendas and to be given complete objectivity. Thats why the 10 commandments needs to be left out of court houses and why prayer need not be said before court proceedings. Using religion gives it a pass from the criticism that secular philosophy constructs and uses to objectively address the inconsistencies of law. Religion claims that because its from God its infallible. Thats DANGEROUS. Especially when the words of God...were written by man. 

 Its about making a more perfect system. Not a system used to prevent change and claim to be forever perfect. Take a class on government buddy. 



Right...so like I said. If Aquinas was catholic...and his views are so similar to Islam... yet he dislikes Islam.. so is Islam wrong? Or is Catholicism wrong? Or...shouldn't you be a catholic instead? 

 

[dame theory]

Originally Posted by Mo Matik

DUDE I already told you that his views are SIMILAR to Islamic thought. I never said that he was directly influenced by Islam. I knew he had harsh criticisms of Islam, as did 99% of Europe at the time. I took a course on Western Political Philosophy and the Summa Theologica was in the curriculum. The whole 'world is innately unjust' thing is something that is integral to his entire basis for a functioning society.

So this proves what? Aquinas and other religious zealots had similar thoughts? or that religious people like to claim ideas as their own?

Dame Theory wrote:

---

Mo Matik wrote:
I am not a moderate.  I am as orthodox as you can get.  My faith relies on 2 things: The Qur'an and Hadith.  I've used tons and tons of other sources to properly understand these 2 sources of information.  My point on 'perfection' I think was unclear.  This world, here, is innately unjust.  Why?  For a number of reasons.  Lets shrink it down to a model of a single society.

-You will not always know for certain whether someone is guilty or not.
-There are many 'wrongs' which cannot be corrected.
-Punishments are inaccurate and subject to times.  Plus, there is a limit to punishment in the form of death.  Killing 50 and killing 100 both will get you the death sentence.  But 1 is more wrong than the other.

Islam acknowledges this innate imperfection of this world, and gives us legitimate realistic solutions for dealing with it.  That's what I was getting at.  St. Thomas Aquinas discusses this stuff too.  His philosophy is actually very close to an Islamic model of thought, if you're familiar with him.

Oh crap...you're orthodox? Then you're DEFINITELY deluded. How do you address the inconsistencies in Islam? Ignore them? 

The world IS innately unjust. The universe is indifferent. Humans want to feel special. They want to be loved. Thats why they invoke these fallacies to bear the pain of living life. You need to find a way to add your own purpose to life. ... 

 @ the audacity of using Thomas Aquinas to support Islam. First of all dude was Catholic. Second of all to support him then shows that all religions draw from the same principles that they want to use for their own...i.e. being narcissistic. Third...I don't think you've read much aquinas. A simple search will show you Aquinas openly spoke about the carnality of Mohammed and invoked his disdain for Islams living for the lust of mohammed. So... tell me where he comes in again? 

. Philosophers have struggled with the concepts of morality and judgement for as long as we can remember...thats why its important for these things not to be left up to the religious agendas and to be given complete objectivity. Thats why the 10 commandments needs to be left out of court houses and why prayer need not be said before court proceedings. Using religion gives it a pass from the criticism that secular philosophy constructs and uses to objectively address the inconsistencies of law. Religion claims that because its from God its infallible. Thats DANGEROUS. Especially when the words of God...were written by man. 

 Its about making a more perfect system. Not a system used to prevent change and claim to be forever perfect. Take a class on government buddy. 



Right...so like I said. If Aquinas was catholic...and his views are so similar to Islam... yet he dislikes Islam.. so is Islam wrong? Or is Catholicism wrong? Or...shouldn't you be a catholic instead? 

 

[ryda421]

Originally Posted by Dame Theory

Originally Posted by Ryda421

i read the whole thread. what i find interesting, is that the bible (christian) speaks of 'the mark of the beast.' and now government is pushing people to get chipped aka mark of the beast.

i understand that may not make sense but it is quite interesting, perhaps it's the same powers. attempting to control you.

 to fully dedicate yourself to a cause/have your mind made up aka religion aka science before hearing an arguing. is some what dumb. it's like politicians or voters saying I"M A REPUBLICAN and i ONLY think REPUBLICAN. how can you have your mind made up if you have not even heard the issue at hand.

it just baffles me that us humans put so much effort into saying I:M RIGHT and YOURE WRONG. why can't we just come to common grounds and move forwards. you think animals waste time like this ?! NO. they just live. it seems like every single human is living a lie, and the ones who are not are
animals.

before watching zeitgeist, i would study other religions, and i found it funny how most were the same. all copy cats of Egyptian mythology. if i were to choose a religion, it would be Buddhism because it teaches peace and understanding. not arguing  who is right or wrong but putting that information together and finding a middle path. NOT TOO HIGH, NOT TO LOW.

I'm not trying to say I'm right or wrong. I'm saying that the beliefs that many subscribe to are INCONSISTENT and OUTDATED. They are on faulty grounds and the support for them when investigated fails to exists.
I've shown myself to be as open-minded as anyone on this board time and time again. I listen and address every argument I can. However when it contradicts itself and that issue can't be resolved, that idea is therefore impossible. Its null and voided. Why waste your time with something that doesn't make sense and never will. Thats what I'm addressing here. Reason and objectivity. Religion doesn't provide that. 

Buddhism is actually pretty awesome in my eyes since it allows people to kinda slide past each other with as little friction as possible...except the God part. I'm just not going to ever going to be given enough proof of that. 

ok. thanks for clearing that up. i was getting the 'im right and youre right wrong' vibe. the same vibe that religion gives off.

i do not doubt that is inconsistent and outdated. but science has some flaws as well. I say that because it seems like at times science is manipulated at times. the thing i like is that science corrects itself constantly. the only difference is that science is not egotistic and actually corrects itself which is something i credit.

i see what you are saying. but IMO there has be a creator or more. this whole cycle is too much for it to just be spontaneous. there has to be reason behind all this. but if there is no reason, then i will be content with that. but until i discover it i will believe that there is some kind of creator. and another reason why i believe in a 'creator' is because of ALIENS/UFOS. there are amazonian tribes which describe UFO/ALIENS landing on earth and leaving creatures. i do not know about you but i would rather believe in amazonian tribes rather than European cultures who have used religion to manipulate civilizations.

 

[ryda421]

Originally Posted by Dame Theory

Originally Posted by Ryda421

i read the whole thread. what i find interesting, is that the bible (christian) speaks of 'the mark of the beast.' and now government is pushing people to get chipped aka mark of the beast.

i understand that may not make sense but it is quite interesting, perhaps it's the same powers. attempting to control you.

 to fully dedicate yourself to a cause/have your mind made up aka religion aka science before hearing an arguing. is some what dumb. it's like politicians or voters saying I"M A REPUBLICAN and i ONLY think REPUBLICAN. how can you have your mind made up if you have not even heard the issue at hand.

it just baffles me that us humans put so much effort into saying I:M RIGHT and YOURE WRONG. why can't we just come to common grounds and move forwards. you think animals waste time like this ?! NO. they just live. it seems like every single human is living a lie, and the ones who are not are
animals.

before watching zeitgeist, i would study other religions, and i found it funny how most were the same. all copy cats of Egyptian mythology. if i were to choose a religion, it would be Buddhism because it teaches peace and understanding. not arguing  who is right or wrong but putting that information together and finding a middle path. NOT TOO HIGH, NOT TO LOW.

I'm not trying to say I'm right or wrong. I'm saying that the beliefs that many subscribe to are INCONSISTENT and OUTDATED. They are on faulty grounds and the support for them when investigated fails to exists.
I've shown myself to be as open-minded as anyone on this board time and time again. I listen and address every argument I can. However when it contradicts itself and that issue can't be resolved, that idea is therefore impossible. Its null and voided. Why waste your time with something that doesn't make sense and never will. Thats what I'm addressing here. Reason and objectivity. Religion doesn't provide that. 

Buddhism is actually pretty awesome in my eyes since it allows people to kinda slide past each other with as little friction as possible...except the God part. I'm just not going to ever going to be given enough proof of that. 

ok. thanks for clearing that up. i was getting the 'im right and youre right wrong' vibe. the same vibe that religion gives off.

i do not doubt that is inconsistent and outdated. but science has some flaws as well. I say that because it seems like at times science is manipulated at times. the thing i like is that science corrects itself constantly. the only difference is that science is not egotistic and actually corrects itself which is something i credit.

i see what you are saying. but IMO there has be a creator or more. this whole cycle is too much for it to just be spontaneous. there has to be reason behind all this. but if there is no reason, then i will be content with that. but until i discover it i will believe that there is some kind of creator. and another reason why i believe in a 'creator' is because of ALIENS/UFOS. there are amazonian tribes which describe UFO/ALIENS landing on earth and leaving creatures. i do not know about you but i would rather believe in amazonian tribes rather than European cultures who have used religion to manipulate civilizations.

 

[hizzle]

Look at all you idiots dissecting every little aspect of a book written by a man. A book which God, if he indeed existed in the sense that you believe, wouldn't even care if you believed in him. That all knowing all mighty God would only care that you led a good life, respecting and caring for other individuals while living peacefully. He wouldn't be a jealous God as your book claims because quite frankly, no being of that stature wouldn't have the capacity to rid themselves of such a useless trait as jealousy and would see past the uselessness of having to submit to them.

 

[hizzle]

Look at all you idiots dissecting every little aspect of a book written by a man. A book which God, if he indeed existed in the sense that you believe, wouldn't even care if you believed in him. That all knowing all mighty God would only care that you led a good life, respecting and caring for other individuals while living peacefully. He wouldn't be a jealous God as your book claims because quite frankly, no being of that stature wouldn't have the capacity to rid themselves of such a useless trait as jealousy and would see past the uselessness of having to submit to them.

 

[dame theory]

Originally Posted by Ryda421

Originally Posted by Dame Theory

Originally Posted by Ryda421

i read the whole thread. what i find interesting, is that the bible (christian) speaks of 'the mark of the beast.' and now government is pushing people to get chipped aka mark of the beast.

i understand that may not make sense but it is quite interesting, perhaps it's the same powers. attempting to control you.

 to fully dedicate yourself to a cause/have your mind made up aka religion aka science before hearing an arguing. is some what dumb. it's like politicians or voters saying I"M A REPUBLICAN and i ONLY think REPUBLICAN. how can you have your mind made up if you have not even heard the issue at hand.

it just baffles me that us humans put so much effort into saying I:M RIGHT and YOURE WRONG. why can't we just come to common grounds and move forwards. you think animals waste time like this ?! NO. they just live. it seems like every single human is living a lie, and the ones who are not are
animals.

before watching zeitgeist, i would study other religions, and i found it funny how most were the same. all copy cats of Egyptian mythology. if i were to choose a religion, it would be Buddhism because it teaches peace and understanding. not arguing  who is right or wrong but putting that information together and finding a middle path. NOT TOO HIGH, NOT TO LOW.

I'm not trying to say I'm right or wrong. I'm saying that the beliefs that many subscribe to are INCONSISTENT and OUTDATED. They are on faulty grounds and the support for them when investigated fails to exists.
I've shown myself to be as open-minded as anyone on this board time and time again. I listen and address every argument I can. However when it contradicts itself and that issue can't be resolved, that idea is therefore impossible. Its null and voided. Why waste your time with something that doesn't make sense and never will. Thats what I'm addressing here. Reason and objectivity. Religion doesn't provide that. 

Buddhism is actually pretty awesome in my eyes since it allows people to kinda slide past each other with as little friction as possible...except the God part. I'm just not going to ever going to be given enough proof of that. 

ok. thanks for clearing that up. i was getting the 'im right and youre right wrong' vibe. the same vibe that religion gives off.

i do not doubt that is inconsistent and outdated. but science has some flaws as well. I say that because it seems like at times science is manipulated at times. the thing i like is that science corrects itself constantly. the only difference is that science is not egotistic and actually corrects itself which is something i credit.

i see what you are saying. but IMO there has be a creator or more. this whole cycle is too much for it to just be spontaneous. there has to be reason behind all this. but if there is no reason, then i will be content with that. but until i discover it i will believe that there is some kind of creator. and another reason why i believe in a 'creator' is because of ALIENS/UFOS. there are amazonian tribes which describe UFO/ALIENS landing on earth and leaving creatures. i do not know about you but i would rather believe in amazonian tribes rather than European cultures who have used religion to manipulate civilizations.

Thanks for acknowledging that science DOES correct itself. It isnt an egotistic field. Scientists CAN have egos to want to be right but the pressure of criticism and replicable results will always win out. Integrity of knowledge always wins. Plus, give me an example where science has flaws? Science isn't manipulated. Understandings of our surroundings can be manipulated. The underlying science will always be evident. 
Sorry but how can you think there is automatically a creator? Like where does that just come from? You need a reason to believe it. You want there to be a purpose...the purpose is no more different than that of bacteria. You are an oversized piece of bacteria. You eat. You respirate. You reproduce. What you do in-between that time is up to you. Thats it. To just continue executing a complex set of biological interactions. Its tough for your to come to grips with because you want to feel special. Everything else you do has purpose so you want there to be some divine understanding. There isn't. There just is not. Once you come to terms with this the sooner you'll be able to live this life to the fullest and not submit to what someone else says as the "divine plan" and instead cherish this day even more knowing that it will never return. Each breath is your last. 
Uh...these uncontacted amazonian tribes see us and think its 1492 again. These people have been COMPLETELY isolated. We need better explanations for what they describe as UFOs. Plus, why do UFOs only contact the most remote and isolated populations in the world? Like always happens. Never more than a few people can bear claim to their existence. Details are always super vague. If you had seen these, why are there more accounts? Why not more detail if its such a traumatic event? Most people that experience trauma can recall each and every detail of that event with severe accuracy.  I'm not so sure you're on the right track here. It could very well be a misunderstanding. 

However...I think there are aliens, because life spontaneously has been shown to occur and in different formats i.e. creatures found in arsenic environments with phosphorous-Ar replacements in their DNA. Crazy #%%$ starts happening with life forms ya'll... Its not as cut and dry as we think. Its silly to think that in the vast expanse of the world that we are the only forms of life. Even microbial. 

We need PROOF.

 

[dame theory]

Originally Posted by Ryda421

Originally Posted by Dame Theory

Originally Posted by Ryda421

i read the whole thread. what i find interesting, is that the bible (christian) speaks of 'the mark of the beast.' and now government is pushing people to get chipped aka mark of the beast.

i understand that may not make sense but it is quite interesting, perhaps it's the same powers. attempting to control you.

 to fully dedicate yourself to a cause/have your mind made up aka religion aka science before hearing an arguing. is some what dumb. it's like politicians or voters saying I"M A REPUBLICAN and i ONLY think REPUBLICAN. how can you have your mind made up if you have not even heard the issue at hand.

it just baffles me that us humans put so much effort into saying I:M RIGHT and YOURE WRONG. why can't we just come to common grounds and move forwards. you think animals waste time like this ?! NO. they just live. it seems like every single human is living a lie, and the ones who are not are
animals.

before watching zeitgeist, i would study other religions, and i found it funny how most were the same. all copy cats of Egyptian mythology. if i were to choose a religion, it would be Buddhism because it teaches peace and understanding. not arguing  who is right or wrong but putting that information together and finding a middle path. NOT TOO HIGH, NOT TO LOW.

I'm not trying to say I'm right or wrong. I'm saying that the beliefs that many subscribe to are INCONSISTENT and OUTDATED. They are on faulty grounds and the support for them when investigated fails to exists.
I've shown myself to be as open-minded as anyone on this board time and time again. I listen and address every argument I can. However when it contradicts itself and that issue can't be resolved, that idea is therefore impossible. Its null and voided. Why waste your time with something that doesn't make sense and never will. Thats what I'm addressing here. Reason and objectivity. Religion doesn't provide that. 

Buddhism is actually pretty awesome in my eyes since it allows people to kinda slide past each other with as little friction as possible...except the God part. I'm just not going to ever going to be given enough proof of that. 

ok. thanks for clearing that up. i was getting the 'im right and youre right wrong' vibe. the same vibe that religion gives off.

i do not doubt that is inconsistent and outdated. but science has some flaws as well. I say that because it seems like at times science is manipulated at times. the thing i like is that science corrects itself constantly. the only difference is that science is not egotistic and actually corrects itself which is something i credit.

i see what you are saying. but IMO there has be a creator or more. this whole cycle is too much for it to just be spontaneous. there has to be reason behind all this. but if there is no reason, then i will be content with that. but until i discover it i will believe that there is some kind of creator. and another reason why i believe in a 'creator' is because of ALIENS/UFOS. there are amazonian tribes which describe UFO/ALIENS landing on earth and leaving creatures. i do not know about you but i would rather believe in amazonian tribes rather than European cultures who have used religion to manipulate civilizations.

Thanks for acknowledging that science DOES correct itself. It isnt an egotistic field. Scientists CAN have egos to want to be right but the pressure of criticism and replicable results will always win out. Integrity of knowledge always wins. Plus, give me an example where science has flaws? Science isn't manipulated. Understandings of our surroundings can be manipulated. The underlying science will always be evident. 
Sorry but how can you think there is automatically a creator? Like where does that just come from? You need a reason to believe it. You want there to be a purpose...the purpose is no more different than that of bacteria. You are an oversized piece of bacteria. You eat. You respirate. You reproduce. What you do in-between that time is up to you. Thats it. To just continue executing a complex set of biological interactions. Its tough for your to come to grips with because you want to feel special. Everything else you do has purpose so you want there to be some divine understanding. There isn't. There just is not. Once you come to terms with this the sooner you'll be able to live this life to the fullest and not submit to what someone else says as the "divine plan" and instead cherish this day even more knowing that it will never return. Each breath is your last. 
Uh...these uncontacted amazonian tribes see us and think its 1492 again. These people have been COMPLETELY isolated. We need better explanations for what they describe as UFOs. Plus, why do UFOs only contact the most remote and isolated populations in the world? Like always happens. Never more than a few people can bear claim to their existence. Details are always super vague. If you had seen these, why are there more accounts? Why not more detail if its such a traumatic event? Most people that experience trauma can recall each and every detail of that event with severe accuracy.  I'm not so sure you're on the right track here. It could very well be a misunderstanding. 

However...I think there are aliens, because life spontaneously has been shown to occur and in different formats i.e. creatures found in arsenic environments with phosphorous-Ar replacements in their DNA. Crazy #%%$ starts happening with life forms ya'll... Its not as cut and dry as we think. Its silly to think that in the vast expanse of the world that we are the only forms of life. Even microbial. 

We need PROOF.

 

[|A-Man|]

Originally Posted by Hizzle

Look at all you idiots dissecting every little aspect of a book written by a man. A book which God, if he indeed existed in the sense that you believe, wouldn't even care if you believed in him. That all knowing all mighty God would only care that you led a good life, respecting and caring for other individuals while living peacefully. He wouldn't be a jealous God as your book claims because quite frankly, no being of that stature wouldn't have the capacity to rid themselves of such a useless trait as jealousy and would see past the uselessness of having to submit to them.

Why would GOD care at all though? Do absentee fathers hope the children they abandoned are good ppl? Do they even care? I was watching a couple shows the other day and the idea just came to me. GOD allegedly knows everything, even before it happens, why create humanity? Foreseeing all of the destruction, corruption, "evil", and hate and still go through with it? Why would a "perfect" being have a hand in something so imperfect? GOD either wanted some entertainment or isn't all loving or all good. So I ask why would a being of that stature even conceive of such an animal as the human being?

 

[|A-Man|]

Originally Posted by Hizzle

Look at all you idiots dissecting every little aspect of a book written by a man. A book which God, if he indeed existed in the sense that you believe, wouldn't even care if you believed in him. That all knowing all mighty God would only care that you led a good life, respecting and caring for other individuals while living peacefully. He wouldn't be a jealous God as your book claims because quite frankly, no being of that stature wouldn't have the capacity to rid themselves of such a useless trait as jealousy and would see past the uselessness of having to submit to them.

Why would GOD care at all though? Do absentee fathers hope the children they abandoned are good ppl? Do they even care? I was watching a couple shows the other day and the idea just came to me. GOD allegedly knows everything, even before it happens, why create humanity? Foreseeing all of the destruction, corruption, "evil", and hate and still go through with it? Why would a "perfect" being have a hand in something so imperfect? GOD either wanted some entertainment or isn't all loving or all good. So I ask why would a being of that stature even conceive of such an animal as the human being?

 

[dame theory]

Mo Matik wrote:

---

The 1.4 billion thing wasn't to make it a popularity contest, it was to put things in perspective.  But it flew over your head.  Instead, you picked out what most critics do, the idea of sheep or a follower.  The argument can be made for both theists and atheists.  http://www.huffingtonpost...merican-re_b_814038.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/scott-perlo/the-vanishing-american-re_b_814038.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/scott-perlo/the-vanishing-american-re_b_814038.htmlThis says nothing. You brought up the number to make it sound like if all these people practice Islam then I must be wrong... Why else would you bring that number up unless you felt there wasn't some strength in the number of followers... your insecurity is showing. Come better than that. 
I said this about the 1.4 billion people and I quote:


"Of those 1.4 billion, how many of them live above the poverty line? How many of them are functionally literate? Religion lives on in the ignorance of its people. When most people are worried about what to eat tonight who has time to really understand that religion is at its core faulty? Plus, you're just joining the popularity contest with a phrase like that. So would you be a muslim if 5 people practiced it? Nah, you wanna do what everyone else you know is doing. "

Mo Matik wrote:

---

Whatever contradictions you have picked out you need to research and see for yourself if they are legitimate or not.  We live in a world where all the information you need is available to you as you sit in that chair.  I'm not going to hand deliver any more info to you when you won't take me seriously despite all my attempts to steer you towards scholarship.  I did my best to not enter this discussion.  I knew where it was going before I even began, and yet here we are.

...Research contradictions...HOMIE THATS WHAT I JUST DID!!! You delivered your strongest arguments and they ALL had fallacies in them. SHEER BLATANT BIASED ILLOGICAL PROPOSITIONS. Yet you still claim i'm not reading the information. bruh, I read EVERY link you put up and showed you your OWN history and yet i'm still the one that doesn't know anything? ... 

 miss me with that. You are tripping. 

Mo Matik wrote:

---

You studied neuroscience and behavioral biology.  Why you still won't concede the significance of thorough research given your background is beyond me.

BECAUSE I'M NOT A MUSLIM AND DONT SEE THE NEED TO STUDY TO BECOME ONE. THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON YOU TO SAY WHY YOU DID IT AND WHY I SHOULD DO IT. 

And I said what i did in school because YOU said what you did in school. You bragged about being a senior Bio major like I give a +%@+. 

 I've studied enough to know that...hey this muslim +%@+... ain't for me! Why? Cause none of it makes sense!

Name ONE proposition/notion/idea that a secular society or person can't do or achieve that a believer in a higher power can. ONE.