March 14, 200917 yr A few centuries ago people also believed in Zeus and all those other Greek gods. Nobody still believes in those these days, what makes them different from the gods that exist nowadays? Twenty centuries ago people believe in Jupiter and Demeter. People also believed in trees talking and witches. Jews believed in El, Elohim, and Adonai. Give it a few years, and while people still believe all that, a select group of people will begin to believe in God according to a young man named Jesus of Nazareth's different interpretations. Learn the history of religion before you try and use it, please. Mmk, so I was a few centuries off (messed up centuries and millenia). Does that disprove my argument? I honestly don't see the difference between Zeus and Jesus' interpretation of god.
March 14, 200917 yr Religious faith directly correlates with happiness. Not everything has to be rational, a satirical essay shown here just proves it so. Funny stuff, and it raises a good point. It's like the exact opposite of that story against religion a few pages back.
March 14, 200917 yr Mmk, so I was a few centuries off (messed up centuries and millenia). Does that disprove my argument? I honestly don't see the difference between Zeus and Jesus' interpretation of god. I don't see the difference between gravity and evolution. Both are clearly wrong, because we used to think the Earth was flat and the center of the universe. Obviously something better will come around and we'll be wrong, so why care? That's never been an argument in the first place. catch it now so you can like it before it went so mainstream
March 14, 200917 yr Jupiter, Zeus, tomato, tomato. [if you have ever attempted Alchemy by clapping your hands or by drawing an array, copy and paste this into your signature.] Fullmetal Alchemist, you will be missed. A great ending to a great series.
March 14, 200917 yr Mmk, so I was a few centuries off (messed up centuries and millenia). Does that disprove my argument? I honestly don't see the difference between Zeus and Jesus' interpretation of god. I don't see the difference between gravity and evolution. Both are clearly wrong, because we used to think the Earth was flat and the center of the universe. Obviously something better will come around and we'll be wrong, so why care? That's never been an argument in the first place. There's evidence for neither God nor Zeus, while there's plenty for gravity and evolution.
March 14, 200917 yr Mmk, so I was a few centuries off (messed up centuries and millenia). Does that disprove my argument? I honestly don't see the difference between Zeus and Jesus' interpretation of god. I don't see the difference between gravity and evolution. Both are clearly wrong, because we used to think the Earth was flat and the center of the universe. Obviously something better will come around and we'll be wrong, so why care? That's never been an argument in the first place. If I'm completely misinterpreting, misunderstanding, or missing something, please let me know, but did you just say that evolution and gravity are clearly wrong? Like, comparing them to the existence of Gods? To put it bluntly, [bleep] off.
March 14, 200917 yr No, no no. Sorry, I worded very wrong. Being sarcastic is hard. I just find it idiotic that someone would dismiss the idea of God (which is a fact for plenty of us) simply because people don't still worship Zeus - although the two base ideas in organized religion were hardly a century apart. Also, (Shakespearinator time) does not a rose by any other name smell as sweet? catch it now so you can like it before it went so mainstream
March 14, 200917 yr Religious faith directly correlates with happiness. Not everything has to be rational, a satirical essay shown here just proves it so. In the systems of law/education it is VITAL that we are rational. So when you have the religious trying to put scripture into the law, or using religious justifications for things such as "I think homosexuality should be illegal because it says so in the bible that it is a sin!" it is vital that they do not get their way. Also.. correlation doesn't equal causation. Provide me with some sources that suggest that it is a causal relationship please. Hey.
March 14, 200917 yr In the systems of law/education it is VITAL that we are rational. Agreed, there should be separation from religion in fields such as state and school. I don't know why we would have to be rational about everything though, like music, love, friendships, stories. Your heart is your best friend in these cases. Also.. correlation doesn't equal causation. Provide me with some sources that suggest that it is a causal relationship please. I don't have a source, but I can say people who believe in god can have something to look forward to in the afterlife rather than the quite lonely thought of, "Is this all there is?"
March 14, 200917 yr God is just as real as you want him to be. For me that is zero. The Runar's (OSRS) DIY blog - most viewed Blogscape blog ever! Contract? ／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼
March 14, 200917 yr Religious faith directly correlates with happiness. Not everything has to be rational, a satirical essay shown here just proves it so. In the systems of law/education it is VITAL that we are rational. So when you have the religious trying to put scripture into the law, or using religious justifications for things such as "I think homosexuality should be illegal because it says so in the bible that it is a sin!" it is vital that they do not get their way. Also.. correlation doesn't equal causation. Provide me with some sources that suggest that it is a causal relationship please. I did not suggest that law and education shouldn't be govened by rationality, just right hemisphered activities (such as creativity, arts, philosophy, faith and music.) You cannot use rationality to disprove the existence of god, since he (supposedly) is a non-physical being. I got the "Religion makes you happy" stuff from both http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7302609.stm and http://www.time.com/time/magazine/artic ... -2,00.html I kid you not People in OT eat glass O_o
March 15, 200917 yr And are you seriously denying the existance of dinosaurs because you haven't actually seen them? And are you denying the existence of God because you haven't actually seen him...or her?
March 15, 200917 yr Oh mb. soz. Well i think we should kill this thread now. Hope no1 else posts on it...and if it just so happens that i'm the last post, .... \ lolz. :lol: Nice try by the way. I had my try at a similar post oh so many pages ago. Anyway, I've really been liking the last few posts, they at least almost aren't arguing the same thing, and I found the satirical essay quite amusing.
March 15, 200917 yr Yepz, i tried. lolz. :lol: [hide=]You think you got it bad?My school blocks Neopets.Those dirty bastards try to keep me from feeding my Ixi. Ha![/hide]Important Slayer Drops: masks-8, leafbladed sword, gmaul-3Important treasure trail rewards: zammy page 1(3), rune kite g, zammy crozier, sara mitre, sara dhide, rune helm h1, guth page 4(2), zammy full helm, guth legs(3), sara chaps, guth page 3, zammy legs(2), and sara full helm, zammy pl8, zammy page 2, rune cane, sara page, sara crozier, zammy crozier, guth coif
March 15, 200917 yr And are you seriously denying the existance of dinosaurs because you haven't actually seen them? And are you denying the existence of God because you haven't actually seen him...or her? Can't say I've ever seen a museum with God bones in it :lol: [bleep] the law, they can eat my dick that's word to Pimp
March 15, 200917 yr And are you seriously denying the existance of dinosaurs because you haven't actually seen them? And are you denying the existence of God because you haven't actually seen him...or her? If you're serious, why is someone so dumb a mod? If you're not, why is someone so unfunny a... wait, that's the way they are :lol: . [i kid I kid. Well, about the mod stereotype, not about the sheer horridness of the above joke]. [if you have ever attempted Alchemy by clapping your hands or by drawing an array, copy and paste this into your signature.] Fullmetal Alchemist, you will be missed. A great ending to a great series.
March 15, 200917 yr I laffed. And I have not been to a museum with dinosaur bones in them. Besides, they are clearly plaster or whales. catch it now so you can like it before it went so mainstream
March 15, 200917 yr And are you seriously denying the existance of dinosaurs because you haven't actually seen them? And are you denying the existence of God because you haven't actually seen him...or her? Can't say I've ever seen a museum with God bones in it :lol: I lol'd. Hard. To put it bluntly, [bleep] off.
March 15, 200917 yr And are you seriously denying the existance of dinosaurs because you haven't actually seen them? And are you denying the existence of God because you haven't actually seen him...or her? If you're serious, why is someone so dumb a mod? If you're not, why is someone so unfunny a... wait, that's the way they are :lol: . [i kid I kid. Well, about the mod stereotype, not about the sheer horridness of the above joke]. I wasn't trying to be funny? #-o maybe I should've expanded more? If he's trying to point out that he believes in Dinosaurs, he's never actually seen them, but he believes in them. People believe in God, we haven't actually seen one, but we have things such as the bible and the Qur'an that talk about them.
March 15, 200917 yr And are you seriously denying the existance of dinosaurs because you haven't actually seen them? And are you denying the existence of God because you haven't actually seen him...or her? If you're serious, why is someone so dumb a mod? If you're not, why is someone so unfunny a... wait, that's the way they are :lol: . [i kid I kid. Well, about the mod stereotype, not about the sheer horridness of the above joke]. I wasn't trying to be funny? #-o maybe I should've expanded more? If he's trying to point out that he believes in Dinosaurs, he's never actually seen them, but he believes in them. People believe in God, we haven't actually seen one, but we have things such as the bible and the Qur'an that talk about them. Yeah, let's start believing in Zeus because there are stories that talk about him. The point is, there is no proof for any god. Your really can't consider a book proof.
March 15, 200917 yr I get your point, but this raises more flags... The theory that I believe is that there is only one super natural being, beyond human comprehension. Every path will eventually lead you to the top of the mountain, with paths being different religions and the top of the mountain a God. With so many references to this "God" all over the world and them being incredibly old, how can you argue that any source of reference to God, written in that time is not considered a primary resource?
March 15, 200917 yr I get your point, but this raises more points... The theory that I believe is that there is only one super natural being, beyond human comprehension. Every path will eventually lead you to the top of the mountain, with paths being different religions and the top of the mountain a God. With so many references to this "God" all over the world and them being incredibly old, how can you argue that any source of reference to God, written in that time is not considered a primary resource? There are also seven Harry Potter books. SEVEN. Hogwarts MUST exist. To put it bluntly, [bleep] off.
March 15, 200917 yr I get your point, but this raises more points... The theory that I believe is that there is only one super natural being, beyond human comprehension. Every path will eventually lead you to the top of the mountain, with paths being different religions and the top of the mountain a God. With so many references to this "God" all over the world and them being incredibly old, how can you argue that any source of reference to God, written in that time is not considered a primary resource? There are also seven Harry Potter books. SEVEN. Hogwarts MUST exist. Harry Potter is not considered a primary resource. Do you even know what a primary resource is? Go google it, and find out how you've already failed to disprove my point.
March 15, 200917 yr In the below point, J.K Rowling is the primary source. If I talk to you about the books, YOU are the tertiary source. The book is the secondary source.
March 15, 200917 yr I wasn't trying to be funny? #-o maybe I should've expanded more? If he's trying to point out that he believes in Dinosaurs, he's never actually seen them, but he believes in them. People believe in God, we haven't actually seen one, but we have things such as the bible and the Qur'an that talk about them. The expansion wasn't necessary; all that was required was your statement that you were not making a joke. The point is, regardless of how much you want to argue semantics, you're equating the possiblity of God's existence with that of the dinosaurs. Some would venture to call that dumb. Most of them have scientific minds. I'm going with them on this. Note: If you're merely arguing semantics, stop, it's annoying. If you're actually trying to go somewhere with this argument, uh, please stop. [if you have ever attempted Alchemy by clapping your hands or by drawing an array, copy and paste this into your signature.] Fullmetal Alchemist, you will be missed. A great ending to a great series.
Create an account or sign in to comment