Davros of Skaro Posted March 9, 2014 #101 Share Posted March 9, 2014 God isn't the man behind the curtain, Lucifer is. God is standing behind you ready to help if you ask and need him. All I ask of your God is to come to Earth, and give a speech to the United Nations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jor-el Posted March 9, 2014 #102 Share Posted March 9, 2014 (edited) I cannot help that you cannot provide evidence that a creator of the universe is the one you believe in. Funny thing that... I once thought that evidence was essential, but truthfully? It isn't, the only evidence that is really needed is how my life changed by trusting in God. Purely personal and non transmissible... Think of it as a love affair. When you fall in love, you believe that the other person loves you, but that comes even before any evidence that supports the belief actually exists and any evidence that does exist only has importance to you and no-one else. The creator is only one, therefore by default I mean him and no-one else. All I ask of your God is to come to Earth, and give a speech to the United Nations. Seriously? I sincerely doubt that even that would really change your mind.... after all anything can be done with todays technology, isn't that right? Edited March 9, 2014 by Jor-el 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Walker Posted March 9, 2014 #103 Share Posted March 9, 2014 (edited) So ignore the man behind the curtain....Got it. No. You (generic) are mad (delusional) if you think there is a man behind the curtain, when none exists. Edited March 9, 2014 by Mr Walker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Walker Posted March 9, 2014 #104 Share Posted March 9, 2014 (edited) All I ask of your God is to come to Earth, and give a speech to the United Nations. If that happened, then people would not accept the entity as god, because it would not fit their preconceptions about god. I don't know your own preconceptions about the nature of god,but imagine if a being of any sort physically materialised and gave a speech to the UN. You would simply say "Oh yes he was real alright but because he was real he wasn't god."Besides all the gods of the universe have a non intervention policy, where they can try and help a race grow wise via sets of disciplines, wisdoms and moralities, but cant force them to, because wisdom and survival must come (and be chosen )from within, and cannot be imposed on any self aware being from without. they have learned from prior experience that imposing behaviours does not allow a race or an individual to choose its own. This is critically important because only informed, self based choice, coming from learned internal wisdom, is a successful driver/ motivator for sapient behaviour. In a civilized universe, or just a local part of an intra galactic civilization, a race must form and chose behaviours to make it peaceful and cooperative. It is not safe or successful to impose such behaviours, because imposition builds resentment may cause an adverse reaction or opposition to that imposition, and simply does not work in the long term. Imagine what would really happen if a "god", or race of "gods", descended from the heavens and started telling us how to behave. The world's initial reaction would be like that of America in the film, "The day the earth stood still" Edited March 9, 2014 by Mr Walker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hideout Posted March 9, 2014 #105 Share Posted March 9, 2014 And religion serves a necessary purpose as well for most of humanity. The priesthood serves a necessary purpose as the servants of religion. Yet... what do we see here on this board? That religion serves to control and the priesthood serves itself. That those who are religious are by definition either nutty in one way or another or they are simply sheep who cannot think for themselves... I suggest that Politics does all this as well, and is even more used than religion. Society is controlled to the utmost by an elite we allowed to take the reigns of power, whether by politics or finance, (they go hand in hand). Science is used for control, most scientific discoveries and applications have come about directly due to war and military applications and as we know, war is simply another form of politics, that serves to impose control on a population. Religion serves no necessary purpose that can't have an exact secular equivalent. I agree with you that politics can, and does, control people. However, we luckily live in a world that is mainly democratic, and so we can influence the outcome of this governmental control. Where as religious law comes from divine command and is beyond question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jor-el Posted March 9, 2014 #106 Share Posted March 9, 2014 Religion serves no necessary purpose that can't have an exact secular equivalent. I agree with you that politics can, and does, control people. However, we luckily live in a world that is mainly democratic, and so we can influence the outcome of this governmental control. Where as religious law comes from divine command and is beyond question. Religion serves no useful purpose for you... for me and many other millions it does indeed serve a purpose and it isn't to control others. Just like in any other thing you could care to name there are good and bad apples in the cart. Hmmm, you must surely be aware that democracy and the west are not as free as you might think. Your choices are limited to candidates who are already beholden unto others... that is why they are the candidates and you are not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cherrypress Posted March 9, 2014 #107 Share Posted March 9, 2014 This question seems to come up a lot. Ultimately it comes down to faith, do you believe? Faith isn't something thats debatable, it is by deffinition the evidence of things hoped for the substance of things not seen. To me, that says faith isn't tangible, and as such science, logic, nor debate touches it. That doesn't demean it in any way in my mind. Similarly, the bible says "render that which is caesar's unto caesar" which I take to mean, the things of the world will be what they are. Things of the spirit like faith, aren't something the world can affect. Do I believe? No... I don't believe in anything.. I either know or I don't. :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cherrypress Posted March 9, 2014 #108 Share Posted March 9, 2014 Religions don't work like that. If they did, they did they wouldn't work From earliest times priest castes and individual shamans etc have been more than willingly supported by the general populace because eof the perception of their incredibly important roles in people's lives beliefs and community. How do you think buildings like stonehenge were built? Tthey were communal and mutual efforts of labour and time Priests had very significant obligations and responsibilities and were held accountable for the success and failures in peoples lives and in the economy, hunting, health etc Every earl human being knew that the world was inhabited by all sorts of spirits and these had to be communicated with and propitiated for life to be safe and successful. You couldn't make beer or even bricks unless the spirits helped you Your crops would wither if the spirits were against you. and you certainly would not have a good hunt if the animal spirits and nature gods were angry with you. The people demanded this role of their priests /shamans etc not the other way around You had to display certain abilities and skills to become a shaman and even a jewish priest had to live, act, and believe totally, in his role every minute of his life They weren't p***ing about, making a lazy living for them selves. They were providing probably the most essential service in any community where the spiritual is more important to life than the physical. Active intercession between man and gods, spirits, and the environment . There was no man or wizard behind the curtain The priests weren't playing the populace. They believed just as strongly as the rest of the people perhaps more so because of their daily lives. When a priest went into the inner sanctum he had a rope attached to his leg This was so he could be pulled out if he dropped dead while in there because the priests believed that if an unsanctified or unprepared man entered the inner sanctuary they would be struck dead .All members of those societies were involved and equally willing participants in this belief structure. They didn't have the advantage of your knowledge and education in order to form divergent views. And why or how could they chose/learn to disbelieve in forces, which were so obvious and omnipresent to them? But religions ultimately don't work.. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davros of Skaro Posted March 9, 2014 #109 Share Posted March 9, 2014 Funny thing that... I once thought that evidence was essential, but truthfully? It isn't, the only evidence that is really needed is how my life changed by trusting in God. Purely personal and non transmissible... Think of it as a love affair. When you fall in love, you believe that the other person loves you, but that comes even before any evidence that supports the belief actually exists and any evidence that does exist only has importance to you and no-one else. Feelings is not evidence, and for Example a Muslim would say the same thing, but they do not believe Jesus died on the Cross. The creator is only one, therefore by default I mean him and no-one else. Leviticus 14 Seriously? I sincerely doubt that even that would really change your mind.... I am serious.I change my mind with evidence. after all anything can be done with todays technology, isn't that right? Please do not tell me that you think the 9/11 planes hitting the WTC towers were holograms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hideout Posted March 9, 2014 #110 Share Posted March 9, 2014 Religion serves no useful purpose for you... for me and many other millions it does indeed serve a purpose and it isn't to control others. Just like in any other thing you could care to name there are good and bad apples in the cart. What purpose? The only purpose I can see someone saying religion serves, is a sense of community. Which can be achieved secularly. Hmmm, you must surely be aware that democracy and the west are not as free as you might think. Your choices are limited to candidates who are already beholden unto others... that is why they are the candidates and you are not. Well, I am not a candidate because I choose not to be involved in politics. Putting that aside, being able to choose between two candidates, and have a say in legislation even if by proxy through representatives, is much better in my mind than being stuck with a divine command. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jor-el Posted March 9, 2014 #111 Share Posted March 9, 2014 But religions ultimately don't work.. Incorrect, religion does work. It is the fuel of the Spirit and the giver of hope when there is none. It is a life changer. There is nothing else out there that can even compare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davros of Skaro Posted March 9, 2014 #112 Share Posted March 9, 2014 If that happened, then people would not accept the entity as god, because it would not fit their preconceptions about god. I don't know your own preconceptions about the nature of god,but imagine if a being of any sort physically materialised and gave a speech to the UN. You would simply say "Oh yes he was real alright but because he was real he wasn't god." Besides all the gods of the universe have a non intervention policy, where they can try and help a race grow wise via sets of disciplines, wisdoms and moralities, but cant force them to, because wisdom and survival must come (and be chosen )from within, and cannot be imposed on any self aware being from without. they have learned from prior experience that imposing behaviours does not allow a race or an individual to choose its own. This is critically important because only informed, self based choice, coming from learned internal wisdom, is a successful driver/ motivator for sapient behaviour. In a civilized universe, or just a local part of an intra galactic civilization, a race must form and chose behaviours to make it peaceful and cooperative. It is not safe or successful to impose such behaviours, because imposition builds resentment may cause an adverse reaction or opposition to that imposition, and simply does not work in the long term. Imagine what would really happen if a "god", or race of "gods", descended from the heavens and started telling us how to behave. The world's initial reaction would be like that of America in the film, "The day the earth stood still" My IQ dropped a couple points reading that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davros of Skaro Posted March 9, 2014 #113 Share Posted March 9, 2014 Incorrect, religion does work. It is the fuel of the Spirit and the giver of hope when there is none. It is a life changer. There is nothing else out there that can even compare. Try a Dopamine injection. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jor-el Posted March 9, 2014 #114 Share Posted March 9, 2014 Feelings is not evidence, and for Example a Muslim would say the same thing, but they do not believe Jesus died on the Cross. Feelings are indeed evidence, for the individual, not for 3rd parties who can't trust the word of others. As such my evidence will never be enough for you, nor yours for me... but mine is enough for me. Leviticus 14 Am I supposed to do anything with the chapter you indicated? I am serious.I change my mind with evidence. Somehow I don't believe that to be true... Please do not tell me that you think the 9/11 planes hitting the WTC towers were holograms. Oh no. they were quite real, but don't tell me that you think Osama Bin Laden was actually responsible.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jor-el Posted March 9, 2014 #115 Share Posted March 9, 2014 What purpose? The only purpose I can see someone saying religion serves, is a sense of community. Which can be achieved secularly. Community is a side effect of the actual cause that religion effects in the individual. That is why we all keep saying that God changes our lives.... not the community. Well, I am not a candidate because I choose not to be involved in politics. Putting that aside, being able to choose between two candidates, and have a say in legislation even if by proxy through representatives, is much better in my mind than being stuck with a divine command. If you ever do try to get involved, tell us how it went... I'd be very interested on what you learnt from that experience and how much change you actually succeeded in effecting... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jor-el Posted March 9, 2014 #116 Share Posted March 9, 2014 Try a Dopamine injection. Sure and that lasts how long before you need another... and another and another..... Do you realize just how much substance abuse there actually is in the world of the non-believer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug1029 Posted March 9, 2014 #117 Share Posted March 9, 2014 (edited) And religion serves a necessary purpose as well for most of humanity. The priesthood serves a necessary purpose as the servants of religion. Yet... what do we see here on this board? That religion serves to control and the priesthood serves itself. When I had the misfortune to serve as a representative from the local Board of Deacons to the Synod, I got a real eye-opener. Number one concern among the professional clergy: raise money. Mostly to furnish them with a good retirement. There were two ministers (out of a hundred+), who lived what they preached. One worked with an inner city homeless shelter. His congregation were alcoholics and drug addicts. There was no money to pay him a salary, so he held a day job - he was a carpenter. And the second one worked with disadvantaged youth, trying to keep them out of jail and get them onto a better track in life. He had a tattoo - left over from his biker days. That went over like a lead balloon among the rest of the folks. I don't know how he made a living. When those two told me they believed, I believed. For the rest: the hypocrisy fairly oozed out of every pore. For them, it was about MONEY and CONTROL. An example: a gentleman who owned a "gentleman's club" sold the place in an owner-financed sale. Shortly thereafter he died, leaving his estate to his local church, including the lien on the business. The new owner didn't have the know-how to run a strip club and was eventually forced into voluntary foreclosure. The church approached a real estate agent/business manager about selling the property. He told them that the best way to get a good price was to keep it up and running and that it would take six months to a year to find a new buyer. So for about a year, the church ran the strip club. It appears they worshipped the Almighty Dollar; though, there are reports of some heavenly bodies being seen in the vicinity. That those who are religious are by definition either nutty in one way or another or they are simply sheep who cannot think for themselves... Don't take this personally, but our local fundies ARE nutty and do not seem to have an original thought. They enjoy the benefits of science, but ignore its lessons. They believe outlandish things without any evidence of any kind to support them. And they think the Rapture is going to save them from their mistakes. And when it comes to helping the less-fortunate, our local churches, by and large, are about as hard-hearted a group as one can imagine. One wouldn't allow homeless people to seek shelter in their sanctuary on the coldest night of the year for fear they'd somehow contaminate it; they'd rather let them die - I submit that sanctuary was already contaminated - by something far worse than homelessness. There's a story about Jesus and a black man walking down the street. They pass an elaborate, expensive whites-only church. The black man says he tried to go in there once, but they threw him out. Jesus says "Don't feel bad; I've been trying to get in there for years." And that, I'm afraid is an all-to-accurate description of the hypocrisy and hatred I see masquerading as religion. Yet there was one small church that opened its doors, threw sleeping bags on the pews and served sandwiches and hot drinks that night. There are a few honest Christians among the loose screw hypocites. A tiny minority actually do try to walk in Jesus' footsteps. I suggest that Politics does all this as well, and is even more used than religion. Society is controlled to the utmost by an elite we allowed to take the reigns of power, whether by politics or finance, (they go hand in hand). Around here, politics and religion are the same thing. Separation of church and state is an alien concept. They want the government to impose right-wing Christianity on everybody. Some are up front about it: they want a theocracy. I suggest that Iran already has that form of government - they should move there. Science is used for control, most scientific discoveries and applications have come about directly due to war and military applications and as we know, war is simply another form of politics, that serves to impose control on a population. Most scientists consider the use of scientific discoveries to kill people or mislead them to be highly unethical. There have been several attempts to expel weapons researchers from their respective professional societies, so far to no avail. What you are seeing is the corrupting influence of big money. And government has the deepest pockets. As far as "most:" you are the one who likes to shout "prove it." Let's see some data to back that up. For myself: everything I have published has dealt with how forests respond to ice storms (Except for one item that dealt with seedling mixes as an indicator of site quality.). An upcoming article on exactly how destructive ice storms are may have economic importance and may, in turn, be something that could be used to gain advantage over somebody else. But I don't see how. And that might be a way for you to obtain your evidence. Simply count the number of military-applications papers published in a three-month period and compare that with the number of non-military applications papers published in the same three months. There are something like 7000 publishing professional journals. Happy counting! Doug Edited March 9, 2014 by Doug1029 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug1029 Posted March 9, 2014 #118 Share Posted March 9, 2014 Sure and that lasts how long before you need another... and another and another..... Do you realize just how much substance abuse there actually is in the world of the non-believer? That is something that could be shown by a correlation study. So let's see one. And even if you can prove correlation, you still don't know which one is the cause, or if both are caused by something else. You have a long way to go in developing this idea. Doug 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davros of Skaro Posted March 10, 2014 #119 Share Posted March 10, 2014 Feelings are indeed evidence, for the individual, not for 3rd parties who can't trust the word of others. As such my evidence will never be enough for you, nor yours for me... but mine is enough for me. You do not respect the power of the mind. Am I supposed to do anything with the chapter you indicated? All I ask for is for everyone reading this is to click the link, and read Leviticus 14. http://www.biblegate... 14&version=KJV quote] A cherry picked video is not proof, besides a case for a rare universe does not prove a designer.What if it was Allah that created the universe, and you had to be purified by fire for 6-12 months because you did not believe the Quran? Somehow I don't believe that to be true... Just because I do not believe your non-evidence? Oh no. they were quite real, but don't tell me that you think Osama Bin Laden was actually responsible.... I have questions, but that's besides the point.The thing is there is so many fake videos that many people do believe that it makes me facepalm.If God came to speak at the U.N. it would be hard to dismiss the multitude of evidence that would be available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug1029 Posted March 10, 2014 #120 Share Posted March 10, 2014 Feelings are indeed evidence, for the individual, not for 3rd parties who can't trust the word of others. As such my evidence will never be enough for you, nor yours for me... but mine is enough for me. Then we have no choice but to regard your opinions as fantasy. You wanted to know why I don't regard most of your posts on the dating of the gospels as valid? That's the reason. Your sources provide lots of opinions, but no observations to back up those opinions. Nobody says that "During the reign of Hadrian, I saw a copy of the gospel of Luke." There are Christian writings from Hadrian's reign, but none of them support the existence of the gospels. There is even one from the reign of Domitian and it has enough "mistakes" (as compared to the modern gospels) that one has to conclude the author wasn't working from a copy of what we call the gospels. Bits and fragments of the gospel stories originated earlier, but the books themselves, were written in two groups, Matthew/Mark about 132-135 and Luke/Acts about 160 (I might have to recant part of the Luke/Acts date; there is some evidence for it being written, or at least, based on material, from about 140. It may be awhile before I can check this out, as I have some real research to do.). Evidence is what this is about. Observations are evidence; feelings are not. Doug Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danielost Posted March 10, 2014 #121 Share Posted March 10, 2014 No one knows when the gospels were written. They give three hundred years as a timeline for them being written. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Walker Posted March 10, 2014 #122 Share Posted March 10, 2014 But religions ultimately don't work.. Actually of course they do and work very well and effectively.. They began as humans evolved self awareness and still exist in every human society today. Where is any evidence that they do not "work"? Ie provide for a very important human need or needs?They serve both individual psychological needs for humans and as a focus for communal expression and unit.y The y got things built and they help people survive. Without christianity unifying the disparate states of Europe, it would have been conquered by the mongols. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pallidin Posted March 10, 2014 #123 Share Posted March 10, 2014 (edited) Where do Christians find the Divinity of Christ? In the man? in the word? or in the spirit? That's a fair question. Surely we, as "modern" humans, seem to have a distaste for ancient religions, much like with the Roman "Gods", which were found, in time, to be false. Could the same thing be considered for the Christian, Jewish or Muslim religion? Edited March 10, 2014 by pallidin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hideout Posted March 10, 2014 #124 Share Posted March 10, 2014 Community is a side effect of the actual cause that religion effects in the individual. That is why we all keep saying that God changes our lives.... not the community. If you ever do try to get involved, tell us how it went... I'd be very interested on what you learnt from that experience and how much change you actually succeeded in effecting... You've still yet to demonstrate what purpose religion serves. You just keep saying it serves a purpose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug1029 Posted March 10, 2014 #125 Share Posted March 10, 2014 No one knows when the gospels were written. They give three hundred years as a timeline for them being written. There are a lot of different opinions as to when the gospels were written. I'm just trying to figure it out. The dates I give may be considered my best estimates to date. I'm not making promises about what I might find as I dig deeper. We do know that there were revisions as late as the early sixth century, but those should be considered redactions to the originals, not original writings. One thing about it: the church didn't consider the gospels holy. They revised God's Word every time they had a new idea. Is that REALLY how one should treat a "sacred" book? Doug Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now