Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


0 Neutral

Profile Information

  • Gender

RuneScape Information

  1. L2Ski


    Interesting idea. I agree with most of it, but this caught my eye. I believe as a Christian (and I assume that most christians also believe this) that desires, as a whole, have the possibility to be, in the end result, a sin. For example, a desire to eat, in its nature, is completely fine, but once that desire extends the point that it becomes all that we want (essentially an "idol") it is sinning (from this comes gluttony, etc.). Similarly, with sex, it is not sinful to want to have sex with a person, but for a person to go beyond their"Sexual" tie with their spouse is adultery, breaking the seventh (I believe) commandment that God has directed us to follow. Now onto the idea of not being able to prove God's existence. This I have to admit is a difficult subject to explain to people who are not of christian/religious faith or background, but I will try my best. Lets say that the world began from the big bang, or just nothing (I'm not quite sure what the current atheistic belief of the origin of the world is, but I will use this for examples sake). So the world is void and cosmos (may not be the correct terms, but whatever). Nothing exists. So from this nothingness, come an explosion or reaction happens, sending atoms, molecules, etc. flying through spacing creating particles and the very beginnings of what we call the universe. Over billions of years, these particles, through a gravitational pole, begin to attach and combine, creating planets, stars, galaxies, etc. Then over billions of more years, tiny microorganisms begin to form and evolve into other microorganisms and so on and so forth. After a couple more billion years, we find ourselves were we are now. Current day society and our beliefs, educations, philosophies, etc. Now, many of you have also heard the argument that many Christians (and other religious people) make, that is "Well if all of this happened and there is no God, then there is no hope and we should have free reign to govern the world however and whatever way we like." I will say, that this is from different perspectives, correct. If there is, fundamentally, no God, then what is stopping us, as a society from tearing ourselves apart? Why, if there is no benefit beyond the time that we die, should we study education and such? Now lets take a look at a world with a God. Our God has created a world, that perfectly suites our needs. It is just the right distance away from the sun that we won't freeze to death in most circumstances. It has just the right combination of gas's in the air to allow us to breathe, protect us from the majority of harmful sun rays, and the right amount of oxygen that we wont combust randomly (for the most part :cool: ). He then went on to create cycles that allow us to have fresh, salt, and other variations of water. He made plants in such a unique way that they take in the gas's that WE exhale and then produce oxygen which WE inhale. On top of all of this, He created animals in such unique ways, that even over billions of years, I personally believe that even through evolution that our body could not have evolved to its "current state." For example, look at the eye. It can focus automatically on anything (with the exception of people with disabilities, etc.) instantaneously, and it can analyze and project 1.5 million different "messages" (or stimuli) simultaneously. Now, through evolution, if a species evolves into a given area, it will keep what ever is beneficial to itself and "shed" whatever is not beneficial. How could something so complex as the eye, go through multiple evolutions over billions of years and still exist? I, personally, have no idea. I seem to be losing my train of thought. I apologize if I am offending anyone or incorrectly stating facts. Please feel free to post questions/answers about this. EDIT: Recommendation: I have benefitted greatly from reading a book called The Reason for God (by Tim Keller). I would greatly suggest, both religious and atheistic people to read this book; it clarifies many different issues and topics that we are discussing within this post.
  2. L2Ski


    I'm not sure if I agree or disagree. haha. I'm not try to "show it off in public" in anyway shape or form, I'm just trying to see what other people think/view life and religion. It's more for growth and learning than really anything else. I'm not trying to prove anyone wrong, because they may or may not be right. I just want to know what other people think. I sincerely apologize if I have done anything beyond this. ^^
  3. big deal. oh sorry bout teh ladies. hookers are cool too. :thumbsup:
  4. L2Ski


    Man! I was gone for a day and a whole 3 new pages to read.. Keep it up! I am enjoying plus benefitting from reading all of your guys' arguments and debates. I saw someone say how religion cannot be disproved with science and philosophy cannot be disproved with science, and vise-versa. This I must say is probably the most wise (for lack of a better word) way to explain why augments like these tend to per say "circulate." I don't have any questions to through at yall, but I might be back on later to check in and see if I can think of anything. Keep it up! NOTE: Remember you guys, try to be polite and professional with each other and also try to understand each others views before trying to disprove them.
  5. L2Ski


    Bro I don't typically like to fling mud but I must say that your argument is completely bone-headed. One doesnt equal zero by pure definition. As a society, we have defined the concept of "zero" to mean "nothing" or "completely lacking". Our word "zero" describes how many objects are in my hand when no objects are in my hand. "One" is how many objects are in my hand when there is more than zero but less than two. It is a single object. It exists. You most certainly can prove, in the sense that we use the word to mean "it is almost certain", that an object that IS somewhere almost certainly is not "zero". Something is more than nothing. Now lets define the concept of "a god" as somebody who magically and spontaneously created the earth as it exists today no more than a few thousand years ago. Then, we find fossils that are millions of years old. Right there, we see a contradiction between what we call "creation by god" and what we call "age". These two ideas have a contradiction with each other. I would also like to point out...if religious people lived the rest of their lives as they choose to "believe" in a diety, here would be a glimpse at the life of a religious person: -You would find it totally acceptable to not take medicine. After all, medicine actually is not PROVEN to work. We just are relatively sure that it does work. Stop taking medicine and just pray to god. Why wouldn't you? -You probably shouldn't get an education. Theres no proof that you aren't going to win the lottery tomorrow. Why not just bank on it? Why not just live your life with a little faith? Is it that hard to have faith in something? -You could randomly decide to go hide in a bomb shelter right this very minute. Theres no stone cold evidence that a 10 megaton bomb isnt falling from the sky right now. -Stop eating. Are you SURE that food gives you nurishment? I mean...REALLY sure? Scientists really haven't provided an infallible proof that food is something we should eat. So since it isn't really PROVEN yet, I should just believe whatever the hell I want to believe. My body only needs air to survive...thats my belief. You can't disprove it! As you can see, most religious people don't live their lives this way. Why? Because they are human. Humans have a logical brain for a reason. We naturally know how to make observations and develop predictions that are in accordance with evidence. Most of our actions are governed by evidence. Yet religion comes along and JUST BECAUSE there are billions of people who spread the superstition, people think that this area of our life is not worth living rationally. Good argument, but I have a question. If religious people are "superstitious" because what they believe may or may not be true, but the Atheists and other non-religionists can go and say that the earth is X amount of years and so on and so forth? If the earth is so old, then we don't we have trees that are say 10,000 years old? 100,000 years old? 1,000,000 years old? and so on? Not that trees should be our overall guidance to the age of the earth, but they do have a time stamp that allows us to date back to years before. I may or may not be wrong, just trying to keep the ideas flowing.
  6. dude. your pants are win. do you sleep in a beanie? bahaha
  7. L2Ski


    I love this! Keep up the arguments, but try to not be over aggressive with your arguments. Keep it nice and professional. I have a question for a couple of you atheists. What are your views of thoughts (just go with me)? Are thoughts all just chemically induced reactions within the brain that allows to decide whether to do or not do a particular action? What about emotions? Are they also within the chemical-brain function? So then, if they are, what about love? Is love truly true? Or is it just a chemically induced feeling that we really can't trust? Also if love is just that, aren't just practically robots powered by chemicals? Another thing is logic. What about it? Is that just a big chemical process going on in your brain? Just a couple of thoughts. I also read someone comparing religions with other religions. I would, from a christian point of view, be very careful about treading on this ground. Almost all religions are different. Some don't believe in god, some believe god is in everything, some believe that they themselves are god, and so on, but you know what sets (possibly) the Christian/Catholic, or variations there of, beliefs apart? We believe that our God not only cares for us, but he also listens and works out EVERYTHING in our individual lives for our greatest good. We do not believe in taking a persons life at all, especially just because they do not see eye to eye with us (well for the most part, extremists may be different). Where as other religions do not always prohibit this and some and even encourage it, but none of these other religions believe that their god truly loves them. They view him as some who, if they do not please him, will smite them down on the spot. That is not my God. Just another thought that I thought I might through out there.
  8. L2Ski


    Ignore the outdated morals rules and laws. They made sense (for the most part) at the time. Religion is philosophy amongst other things. Was there actually a man who ate from the tree of knowledge which caused the human race to become imperfect? Of course not. Only fundamentalists believe this. What about technology creating weapons that allow us to destroy ourselves? What about advanced medicine being a major contributor to overpopulation and thus reduced standards of living? Since evolution is so slow, our bodies are the same as our tribal ancestors, yet we live in a much different environment. We aren't designed to live with 'knowledge.' Interesting concept. So maybe.. We are supposed to rely on something to guide us? (I feel like a complete religious nut right now, but don't judge me. I'm just throwing ideas out)
  9. L2Ski


    Yes. Religion is a delusion, and so is rationality or even delusions. Everything is a delusion :) And for some reason it's okay to disrespect one delusion but not another. It's somehow absurd to think that the religious man's delusion is less a delusion than Weapon's, here. I'm not religious. Didn't think I'd have to point that out again but everyone seems to think I am. Weapon's post - both versions - exemplifies what I hate about antitheists. Namely, the belief that their beliefs are untouchable but anyone else's are worthy of mockery. To be honest, Mask, I would almost say that I am the religious version of you. Hahaha. 'cept you are much better at arguing, but with practice comes perfection (well not really, but whatever).
  10. L2Ski


    Man, I love this! Good arguments by you all, since I was gone most of the day I don't have time to respond to each of you individually, but I agree with bits and pieces of each of your guys' statements. @ Da_Latios: As Mask stated, people are very focused on the leviticus passages, which may or may not be a bad thing. One reason why many people excuse these Old testament laws is because frankly they were set-up for a group of people who did not have modern day doctors, anti-bacterial soaps, running water to bathe, etc. For example, you stated "I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness - Lev.15:19- 24. The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense." many people know that a group of women, when living in a group, will after sometime all begin to have their "time" around the same date. Also, you forgot to mention that it says that women should leave (not direct quotation) for I believe 7 days. So in a way, when these laws were written, they were allowing the women to leave and have I guess women to women time where they could persay paint nails, have parties, etc. I'd love to continue discussing this, but i'm running out of time. Sorry I can't respond to more. Keep up the discussion!! EDIT: If this doesn't make any sense, I apologize. I am quite tired and may or may not be thinking very coherently.
  11. i really liked that song. bahaha. what other bands do you like? i bet i know some of them. i've never heard of that one though. it was good though.
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.