Originally posted by stellspalfieThose that got rid of capital punishment did not do so because they believed it was murder as you think. The reason they got rid of it was to prevent the wrongly convicted from having their chance to be proven not guilty terminated too soon. That happened because after the execution of many that were convicted of murder, it was later determined that someone else had actually committed the crime. Some were lucky and this was discovered while they were on death row.
it is murder. thats why any forward thinking, moral society has gotten rid of the death penalty.
The Instructor
Originally posted by ZahlanziThat is why I am not a fundamentalist. I try to use my mental powers to help people become saved and to establish God's Kingdom on Earth as it is in Heaven.
People need to make sense of the world. They need comforting. to some, a benevolent supreme being is the answer. the question is not how some people get sucked into religion, the real problem is how do they get sucked into fundamentalism.
Religion without fundamentalism does no harm. It helps people feel protected. It gives them hope. Religion without ...[text shortened]... n some of the genetics behind it. Being religious makes me happy, happier than being an atheist.
HalleluYah !!! Praise the LORD! Glory be to God! Holy! Holy! Holy!
The Instruictor
Originally posted by sonhouseBut if evilution was not how it works, wouldn't you tell them that too? That is what the God of the Holy Bible has done for us.
Happier than an atheist? That is a stretch. You have to be saying in some respects you feel believing in nonsense is superior to not believing in nonsense.
To Checkcasher🙂
So I am a god. I have infinite power. I would set things up in such a way as to make beings as good as I could make them, not this hodge podge of humanity, like blood vessels in fr ...[text shortened]... ng side evolution because I would show them evolution is how I work.
That kind of thing?
He also told us how to have a wonderful life on Earth and even started us out with a paradise garden. However, we would not listen to Him and now we are in this mess.
The Instructor
Originally posted by RJHindsBut evolution is how it works. Did you ever consider there could be evolution AND a "God" of some sort?
But if evilution was not how it works, wouldn't you tell them that too? That is what the God of the Holy Bible has done for us.
He also told us how to have a wonderful life on Earth and even started us out with a paradise garden. However, we would not listen to Him and now we are in this mess.
The Instructor
Also it was Adam and Eve in the garden, not us.
Originally posted by karoly aczelYes, Adam and Eve were in that garden, but if they were our ancestors, then they were the human representatives at that time for all of us, who were to follow. So we got the benefit of the inheritence, good or bad, that they left to those that followed, to include you and me.
But evolution is how it works. Did you ever consider there could be evolution AND a "God" of some sort?
Also it was Adam and Eve in the garden, not us.
To answer your question now. Yes, I considered the possibility of no God and evolution and God with evolution. And over time the idea of no God and evolution became ridiculous to me, for even, if variation in species was the only thing necessary to believe in evolution, I still needed a God of the gaps. But when I considered what God this could be, the only one that came up was the God of the Holy Bible. Then after studying the Holy Bible, I was able to see that if it were true, which I came to believe it was, then evilution was ruled out, but I could at least accept the idea of variations in species by natural selection.
The Instructor
Originally posted by RJHindsOn the other hand, going back to the idea of what I would do if I were a god, I would not even WANT to be responsible for the movement of every frigging atom of matter in the entire universe from the time it was born till the time it dies. That is just so preposterous an idea, it just goes to show you how arrogant humans are when they think about what a god would be like.
Yes, Adam and Eve were in that garden, but if they were our ancestors, then they were the human representatives at that time for all of us, who were to follow. So we got the benefit of the inheritence, good or bad, that they left to those that followed, to include you and me.
To answer your question now. Yes, I considered the possibility of no God and e ...[text shortened]... could at least accept the idea of variations in species by natural selection.
The Instructor
A real god would NEVER want to be stuck babysitting an entire universe even if it was in its bag of tricks to be able to do so. Can you imagine the decision making process where said god looks at every single atom of matter in the universe and IT decides on the path that every single atom of the universe takes from the day it was born in the explosion of a sun till the day it blows apart in some reaction or other? Or on even a smaller level, directing the flow of every single quantum of time and space and every single force of matter, using a force totally unknown to mankind, controlling how each quark comes together to make each atom.
You go down that road, you quickly can get mired in obsession.
A god would not WANT that babysitting job. If there is anything I am sure of it is that god if anything would set up the rules, roll the dice, push the button that makes our universe and let everything roll as it will come what may.
And that being the case, said god would have much more fun designing the rules of each universe it creates, having a montage of universes with slightly different rules where each universe can be on its living room shelf where his god buddies can admire his handiwork.
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindsHe has done no such thing, and to say He did is deceiving.
But if evilution was not how it works, wouldn't you tell them that too? That is what the God of the Holy Bible has done for us.
Or are you one of these idiots who scream out, "It's not in the Bible, so it ain't so!!"? The fact is, He left it for us to figure out.
Last I checked, He really hasn't weighed in on the matter.
Originally posted by sonhouseNow this, I can totally get behind.
On the other hand, going back to the idea of what I would do if I were a god, I would not even WANT to be responsible for the movement of every frigging atom of matter in the entire universe from the time it was born till the time it dies. That is just so preposterous an idea, it just goes to show you how arrogant humans are when they think about what a god ...[text shortened]... re each universe can be on its living room shelf where his god buddies can admire his handiwork.
Most of your ideas are so mired in religious hatred, it's hard to tell what's what, but this is clear and succinct. And probably true.
Except maybe the multi-god, multi-universe ending. 🙂
Originally posted by stellspalfieEr, you don't know your forms very well I see. Form b36-c is the "permission to RANT' form. Permission to SPEAK is b36-D. You really need to delve into the laws on this before speaking out so rudely🙂
sorry boss, i forgot to submit my b36-c 'permission to speak' form.
Originally posted by sonhouseI know you don't like to be responsible. Perhaps someone else has learned something from your rantings, but not me.
On the other hand, going back to the idea of what I would do if I were a god, I would not even WANT to be responsible for the movement of every frigging atom of matter in the entire universe from the time it was born till the time it dies. That is just so preposterous an idea, it just goes to show you how arrogant humans are when they think about what a god ...[text shortened]... re each universe can be on its living room shelf where his god buddies can admire his handiwork.
The Instructor
1 edit
Originally posted by SuzianneWhen God tells us that He created each 'kind" and that each "kind" is to multipy after their own "kind" then, even you, should be able to figure out that is not "evilution" MY DEAR.
He has done no such thing, and to say He did is deceiving.
Or are you one of these idiots who scream out, "It's not in the Bible, so it ain't so!!"? The fact is, He left it for us to figure out.
Last I checked, He really hasn't weighed in on the matter.
The Instructor
Originally posted by sonhouseHappier than an atheist?
Happier than an atheist? That is a stretch. You have to be saying in some respects you feel believing in nonsense is superior to not believing in nonsense.
To Checkcasher🙂
So I am a god. I have infinite power. I would set things up in such a way as to make beings as good as I could make them, not this hodge podge of humanity, like blood vessels in fr ...[text shortened]... ng side evolution because I would show them evolution is how I work.
That kind of thing?
no, you misunderstood. happier than i would be if I was an atheist. it is a personal choice. MY world is better because i have faith.
Absolutely all your points on the concept of a supreme being revolve around the notion of the abrahamic god, as presented in the old testament and yes, your position is very easy to defend if you look at the old testament god. or even the paulian mysoginistic god. Have you ever considered that the god presented in the bible or the quran is but an interpretation, and nothing more? that many of those characteristics are simply a flawed view humans have on spirituality? that godhood is an ongoing quest, of understanding, discovery?
"When you base your religion on obvious lies"
this argument is very tiresome. only fundamentalists view the flood as "base" for any religion. the catholic church, non fundamentalist jews, muslims, none consider the possibility of a young earth. so why do you bring these up? what use could these arguments possibly have? the hinds or the carrobie won't change their minds no matter what, and the other theists have no problem accepting obvious science.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
Originally posted by Zahlanzi"...and the other theists have no problem accepting obvious science."
"When you base your religion on obvious lies"
this argument is very tiresome. only fundamentalists view the flood as "base" for any religion. the catholic church, non fundamentalist jews, muslims, none consider the possibility of a young earth. so why do you bring these up? what use could these arguments possibly have? the hinds or the carrobie won't chang ...[text shortened]... nds no matter what, and the other theists have no problem accepting obvious science.
I have to disagree, all theists have a problem accepting science.
Science is the method of determining what is or is not real.
It's how we discover how reality works and what reality is.
It's how we tell what exists.
If you claim that a god exists then that is a claim that science can test.
We've been looking at the universe (scientifically) for roughly 2 centuries
and we now have a very detailed and accurate understanding of how it
functions.
We also have a pretty detailed and accurate idea of what we are and how
we function.
And while there are many questions still to be answered, we can say with
as close to certainty as you can get in this reality (or any other) that we
are the product of our bodies and brains.
There is no soul, no spirit, no life force, just matter doing it's thing according
to the laws of physics.
There are also no gods, afterlives, or supernatural.
If there were we would have found them by now.
Science has answered the questions of "are there gods/" and "what
happens when you die?"
The answers are "no" and "you cease to exist".
If you believe otherwise then you don't accept the science.
You cannot believe in god and accept science.