Atheism/Theism thread

[Reincarnate]

Originally Posted by RB_Spirit

Are you referring to darwins theory? curious, because i know nothing about evolution, or other forms of it. I'm just a bit curious as to what improvements have been made since his supposed, "flawed theory".

Evolution is not flawed -- it's a scientific fact.

[ilikexd]

Originally Posted by RB_Spirit

Are you referring to darwins theory? curious, because i know nothing about evolution, or other forms of it. I'm just a bit curious as to what improvements have been made since his supposed, "flawed theory".

Well now it's pretty much the foundation of the entire field of zoology.

And you can observe evolution happen in many aspects in the world, not just in life. For example, languages change over time based on the same things that govern natural selection (one of the primary causes of evolution).

Evolution is a really cool thing. If you know nothing about it, I really recommend you do a little reading.

Also, where did you get the notion that it's a "flawed theory"? Who told you that? Because you couldn't have made that determination yourself, seeing as you say you know nothing about evolution.


And in case you didn't know: Evolution and God(s) aren't mutually exclusive. You can be a theist and still observe evolutionary processes in the world.

[RB_Spirit]

I said, "supposed flaw" merely because i'm aware that before darwin died, he himself stated it was flawed to an extent, from what i'm understanding, and that's interesting, thanks a lot ilikexd.

[RB_Spirit]

Originally Posted by Reincarnate

Evolution is not flawed -- it's a scientific fact.

The entire world is flawed to an extent, including science, not to single one particular subject out, but it's definitely a fact.

Hoorah for double post!~

[ilikexd]

The "flaw" you may be referring to is, that even though he noticed all the evolutionary changes from natural selection (what he called at the time "Descent with Modification"), he couldn't explain the actual reason these species changed over time.

It was later that Mendel's work started to discovered the ways parents pass off traits to their offspring, which continued and still continues to be developed today -- the field of study called Genetics.


To summarize, he knew what was going on and why it happened, he was just bothered that he couldn't figure out how it was happening.

[Reincarnate]

Originally Posted by RB_Spirit

I said, "supposed flaw" merely because i'm aware that before darwin died, he himself stated it was flawed to an extent, from what i'm understanding, and that's interesting, thanks a lot ilikexd.

Nope -- Darwin did not "doubt his own theory" or say it was "flawed," etc. The people who claim this usually quotemine.

Even so, even if he did doubt the theory in the end (which he didn't), the science still holds up in the end anyway.

[ilikexd]

But that's the great thing about science.

We can come up with amazing new ideas about how the world operates, based on empirical evidence and analysis.

We can admit that we are unsure about some parts of theories, or that there seem to be "missing pieces" that make us doubt.

But later on in time somebody else may make a new discovery that causes everything to make sense.

Such is the example of the later discovery of genetic inheritance supporting natural selection, along with new discoveries about the Earth and how it goes through changes that take place over very long time scales, which helped support the idea of slow evolution over time -- in contrast to a more prevalent "young Earth" hypothesis.

[Cavernio]

Spitfire, unfortunately because it's incredibly awkward, you would need to read and respond to all my posts in the thread, not just that single one, as they have a flow and I believe I begin by addressing what you've said in my first post of the thread.
Eg: white supremacy didn't arise from religion, nor does it need support from God to make these people think they're in the right. That many white supremacists seem to be christian speaks to what I see the root of the problem as being; people who won't consider that they're wrong or who won't try to better themselves or who blindly follow what someone else says or who would become outcasts if they adopted different values.
Ah, an even better example would be Hutus and Tutsis in Rwanda, a massive conflict that has nothing to do with religion.

"Too often is it used to promote bigoted and outdated ideas" I agree with that statement. But putting a blanket of religion over bigoted and outdated ideas doesn't make it the religion that's wrong. Religion adopts all sorts of beliefs and moral standpoints that are hot topics of debate within their own cultural context, they're not static belief systems.

"It is pretty obvious that religion was the single biggest driving force behind the Salem Witch Trials and that it wasn't done as some sort of group-bonding exercise. Group-bonding may have been an after-effect but it wouldn't have been the primary cause. You need a stronger motive to do that, something which religion can provide."

I didn't means to say it was a group-bonding excersise, I was trying to say that it was the force of a group of people outting people who were different than themselves. Which now that I read more about them isn't really true as it was all about trying to find someone to blame for what was probably ergot poisoning.
(Totally aside it makes me see that medicine is still just as retarded as it was back then because if you don't have an explanation, we still blame in on things that are fairly baseless, instead of demons it's all just in your head. Oh how we've advanced.)

I also realize how impossible it is to separate religion from culture when religion IS the only culture. I couldn't have picked a worse thing to reference to try and support my point, since yes, if people didn't believe witchcraft existed, this would never have happened. And yes, in this case, I do see religion as the precipitating cause. I should stick to modern events that we can dissect and understand the context.
Nevertheless, I 100% disagree, in general, that the desire to be part of a group isn't strong enough motive for people to believe someone's done something they haven't and then do horrendous things to them. It's almost the only motive. Even reading this terrible example, the Intial Events section that wikipedia has about the salem witch trials sites that every single one of those people is an outcast or dissenter of some sort, someone who's not part of the usual group, before the whole thing escalates.

[star reaper]

I think the biggest problem for everyone here looking at different views is because of a personal bias based on the one everyone begins with.

[retching oesophagus]

Originally Posted by Cavernio

That many white supremacists seem to be christian speaks to what I see the root of the problem as being; people who won't consider that they're wrong or who won't try to better themselves or who blindly follow what someone else says or who would become outcasts if they adopted different values.

That many white supremacists also seem to be christian tells me that there probably is a link between the two. If the root of the problem is people who won't consider that they are wrong, then why do they think that way? Because their religion gives them the conviction that they are right. Therefore, religion does seem to be at the root of it. People who blindly follow are controlled into doing so by their religion and why are people who adopt different values outcast? Because their religion commands it so.

Originally Posted by Cavernio

Ah, an even better example would be Hutus and Tutsis in Rwanda, a massive conflict that has nothing to do with religion.

Honestly, how can you keep making such wrong statements? Do you not know the role the catholic church played in spreading the racist ideology amongst the Rwandans that eventually led to the genocide against the Tutsi people? Religion had a lot to do with the conflict.

Originally Posted by Cavernio

"Too often is it used to promote bigoted and outdated ideas" I agree with that statement. But putting a blanket of religion over bigoted and outdated ideas doesn't make it the religion that's wrong. Religion adopts all sorts of beliefs and moral standpoints that are hot topics of debate within their own cultural context, they're not static belief systems

If a religion keeps on inspiring bigoted and outdated ideas wouldn't you say there's a good chance of the religion being wrong. It's not beyond the realm of possibility seeing that all religions are man-made sets of beliefs, very fallible, and prone to making people doing crazy things. Also I don't think you are providing a very accurate portrait of religion. Religion takes specific values and reinforces them on its followers. The people who run it are very resistant to change and are not normally welcome to others viewpoints. And I don't think I would want to take part in the hot topics of debate that were happening at the Salem Witch Trials.

Originally Posted by Cavernio

(Totally aside it makes me see that medicine is still just as retarded as it was back then because if you don't have an explanation, we still blame in on things that are fairly baseless, instead of demons it's all just in your head. Oh how we've advanced.)

The idea that you think medicine is just as retarded as it was back then is pretty funny. Care to try some trepanation? Or maybe it is just in your head.

Originally Posted by Cavernio

Nevertheless, I 100% disagree, in general, that the desire to be part of a group isn't strong enough motive for people to believe someone's done something they haven't and then do horrendous things to them. It's almost the only motive. Even reading this terrible example, the Intial Events section that wikipedia has about the salem witch trials sites that every single one of those people is an outcast or dissenter of some sort, someone who's not part of the usual group, before the whole thing escalates.

You say the desire to be part of a group is almost the only motive. Well in this case the group is a religious group and to be part of the group you have to follow the religion. The religion makes them fearful of God and to believe in sin and the Devil and makes them do crazy things like witch-burning. And why are they especially fearful of outsiders and dissenters? Because their religion has helped make them that way. Religion is what influenced their behaviour. You seem to be trying to absolve religion of all blame, even when it is responsible.

[moches]

Originally Posted by star reaper

I think the biggest problem for everyone here looking at different views is because of a personal bias based on the one everyone begins with.

this is a good point: I'm a Christian (though incredibly moderate) and was raised throughout my entire childhood in the church. my thoughts are obviously going to be quite different from the dude raised by atheists. honestly, I find the question of religion to be an incredibly personal issue and I'm not going to try and convert anybody in here. finding one's inner peace is more important, imo (though how you define "peace" is going to differ from person to person).

I will, however, include one of the more interesting posts on religion (one I've been turning over in my head for quite some time, in fact) I've seen on the interwebs:

I don't think they're trying to say they are the same, they are simply saying that their personal experience of conviction is the same. Like, if a person saw the sun, but lived the rest of their life underground in a world of people telling them no such thing exists, they would still believe in the sun. Why? They experienced it. They may be told many times that it was a hallucination, and given many examples as to why it wasn't real. However, to them, they experienced it and it was real and continues to be real even when it is not being experienced.

If a person had an experience of faith it is going to be the same way. Even at times when it is explained away, even with many arguments being made against it, being compared to other things that look similar to it, even when they are not actively experiencing it, they are going to follow along with their own memory of their own conviction that they experienced something very real. Most of them take it passively, anyway. They aren't going to hold their life to a strict standard of faith and they wouldn't hold their life a strict standard of science if they didn't believe. Most people just don't want to try so hard at being right about everything and go with what feels nice to them.

Now, that isn't something you can defend. It's unobservable, unrecordable, irreplicable, indemonstrable, etc. However, that conviction is there, not just a faint memory of a possibility, the very conviction itself is actively keeping its grasp. That person may or may not be warping their view of everything else to fall in line with that conviction, although it seems more common to do so. However, the state of the situation is that they didn't choose for it to take hold and they can't choose to shake it away. I've seen athiests enjoy videos on youtube by Evid3nc3. Well if faith does work on a matrix like that, you should take that as something that happens with people and also not expect them to work hard at deconstructing their own matrix.

Whatever it is, it is a very real and incredibly common phenomenon in humanity, and people who experience it should be shown the dignity of being normal human beings and reacting to their experience as normal human beings seem to do. Perhaps you don't like it, so maybe it is like another normal thing that isn't pleasing, like anger. You can say it is not ideal, something we shouldn't follow, something we can work to change, something we can master... yet, ultimately, something that is normal for humans to feel and shouldn't be judged for if feeling it, but only for acting in damaging ways because of it.

anyway, this thread has been a very interesting read so far, and I hope it leads to understanding on both sides.

[JJTrixX]

Originally Posted by star reaper

Well, from a Biblical point of view that doesn't match up. I have seen many arguments that don't look at all the things written in the Bible. You have the fall of Adam and Eve from eating the forbidden fruit. Sin enters the world through that, and that's why we die. We are disconnected from God and since God is life and we are separated from him, we die, and are dead from our sins.

John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son,
that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life
through Jesus Christ our Lord

We have all broken God's commandments and for that reason, mankind is lost spiritually. The Bible says that the "wages of sin is death". What is a wage? It is what you earn. We have all sinned and therefore we all have earned death. The Bible says in Ezekiel 18:20, "The soul that sinneth, it shall die." Man has broken God's commandments. Sin separates man from God. The Lord God is holy and cannot have sin in His presence. The Bible tells us that even if a person breaks just one commandment, it is like breaking them all. James 2:10 tells us: "For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all." This means that even if you break one commandment, it is as if you broke them all for you stand guilty before the Holy God. That is God's Holy standard. None of us have kept every commandment. We have broken God's Law. We are all sinners. God’s justice requires that sin receive its full penalty.The suffering and sacrificial death of the Lord Jesus upon the cross satisfied the requirements of God’s justice. Jesus Christ died for our sins. He suffered the penalty of the Law we had broken. Jesus suffered our punishment-- He took our
place.

[Dorby]

You do realize Santa Claus isn't real, right?

[Oni-Paranoia]

Originally Posted by JJTrixX

We are all sinners. God’s justice requires that sin receive its full penalty.The suffering and sacrificial death of the Lord Jesus upon the cross satisfied the requirements of God’s justice. Jesus Christ died for our sins. He suffered the penalty of the Law we had broken. Jesus suffered our punishment-- He took our
place.

Who determined that killing Jesus was going to satisfy God? It's almost like tossing beautiful, young virgin girls into a volcano to satisfy an islands fiery God that lives beneath said island.

And while I'm here, let me ask this. God forgives, correct? So breaking a commandment isn't really bad as long as someone makes a confession and has their sins removed or cleansed or whatever you call it. On top of that, why didn't the great Jesus just confess to a bunch of sins of those he died for if that's what people do today?

Excuse my ignorance as I haven't dug deep into the subject. I tried to before while I was on a retreat (yes, 3 days and nights with no outside connection, just pure God (had to impress an ex-girl's family)) and I was just pushed away or told the typical "God has a plan", "God chooses those he wants", "God is almighty and should not be questioned" responses.

[JJTrixX]

Originally Posted by Oni-Paranoia

Who determined that killing Jesus was going to satisfy God?

God forgives, correct?

On top of that, why didn't the great Jesus just confess to a bunch of sins of those he died for if that's what people do today?

Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea. He was Caesar’s representative and, as such, was the greatest authority in the land. He had power over life and death. Thus, in the morning, Jesus Christ was brought to him for the final verdict. Pilate interviewed Christ and made his power clear to Him: "Do you not know that I have power to crucify You and power to release You" (John 19:10). Afterwards, he shared his obvious conclusion with the chief priests: “I find no fault in him.” (Luke 23:4).

Though he was convinced of Jesus Christ’s innocence, and though he tried to dissuade the priests and the crowd from their aim to have Christ killed, he finally relented to the blood-thirsty religious leaders: "When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it" (Matthew 27:24). The reason why he surrendered to the will of the angry crowd is given to us in the Gospel of John: "The Jews insisted, we have a law, and according to that law he must die, because he claimed to be the Son of God. When Pilate heard this, he was even more afraid..."(John 19:7-8).

Clearly Pilate’s decision was motivated by the fear of a potential revolt. Therefore, to keep the leaders happy, and to prevent a dangerous rebellion, he relented to their request. Thus, though Pilate had the power to prevent Jesus Christ’s death, he chose to sacrifice an innocent man to keep the peace. Pilate, therefore, was a willing participant and contributed to Christ’s death.

Yes, God is forgiving.

The Lord instructed man to make unblemished animal sacrifices for their sin. The Bible tells us that "For without the shedding of blood, there is no remission for sin." The blood of these animals covered man's sins but the blood of animals could not actually take sins away. God had a wonderful plan to restore mankind unto Himself. This plan would take away the sins of the world. God sent His only Begotten Son to become a man and to shed His blood and to die for our sins. The Lord Jesus never sinned and therefore willingly died for us -- being the perfect and holy sacrifice for our sins. Our sins were laid upon Him as He died for us.

[star reaper]

Originally Posted by Oni-Paranoia

Who determined that killing Jesus was going to satisfy God? It's almost like tossing beautiful, young virgin girls into a volcano to satisfy an islands fiery God that lives beneath said island.

And while I'm here, let me ask this. God forgives, correct? So breaking a commandment isn't really bad as long as someone makes a confession and has their sins removed or cleansed or whatever you call it. On top of that, why didn't the great Jesus just confess to a bunch of sins of those he died for if that's what people do today?

Excuse my ignorance as I haven't dug deep into the subject. I tried to before while I was on a retreat (yes, 3 days and nights with no outside connection, just pure God (had to impress an ex-girl's family)) and I was just pushed away or told the typical "God has a plan", "God chooses those he wants", "God is almighty and should not be questioned" responses.

God determined that in (Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.) We have all sinned and deserve God's judgment. God, the Father, sent His only Son to satisfy that judgment for those who believe in Him. Jesus, the creator and eternal Son of God, who lived a sinless life, loves us so much that He died for our sins, taking the punishment that we deserve, was buried, and rose from the dead according to the Bible. you had said (It's almost like tossing beautiful, young virgin girls into a volcano to satisfy an islands fiery God that lives beneath said island.) well, from the events that actually happened it's more of like that GOD killed his son to justify humanity. It was Jesus GOD's son, not just a man who died on the cross. Because GOD is Righteous, and a Judge, upon many others he must have a judgments passed on to those who broke the law. He can't be just if he allows those who have broken the law to be unpunished. So, that's why he sent his son in our place.

you also said (And while I'm here, let me ask this. God forgives, correct? So breaking a commandment isn't really bad as long as someone makes a confession and has their sins removed or cleansed or whatever you call it)
Salvation comes from turning away and repenting. To repent is to realize your sins which can be seen through the law. To turn away is to no longer doing what you have done. Of course you can't do this on your own. Of course you aren't going to be a changed person over night either. It's only through the power of Christ that we can truly change. The turning away from our sins is what proves that we have accepted salvation. That we realize we need a savior to save us from ourselves. Jeremiah 17:9 The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?

[JJTrixX]

Originally Posted by star reaper

God determined that in (Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.) We have all sinned and deserve God's judgment. God, the Father, sent His only Son to satisfy that judgment for those who believe in Him. Jesus, the creator and eternal Son of God, who lived a sinless life, loves us so much that He died for our sins, taking the punishment that we deserve, was buried, and rose from the dead according to the Bible. you had said (It's almost like tossing beautiful, young virgin girls into a volcano to satisfy an islands fiery God that lives beneath said island.) well, from the events that actually happened it's more of like that GOD killed his son to justify humanity. It was Jesus GOD's son, not just a man who died on the cross. Because GOD is Righteous, and a Judge, upon many others he must have a judgments passed on to those who broke the law. He can't be just if he allows those who have broken the law to be unpunished. So, that's why he sent his son in our place.

you also said (And while I'm here, let me ask this. God forgives, correct? So breaking a commandment isn't really bad as long as someone makes a confession and has their sins removed or cleansed or whatever you call it)
Salvation comes from turning away and repenting. To repent is to realize your sins which can be seen through the law. To turn away is to no longer doing what you have done. Of course you can't do this on your own. Of course you aren't going to be a changed person over night either. It's only through the power of Christ that we can truly change. The turning away from our sins is what proves that we have accepted salvation. That we realize we need a savior to save us from ourselves. Jeremiah 17:9 The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?

Amen.

[adlp]

it's nice seeing other christians in this thread now because i've always been interested in how other religions view Jesus' ministry

[UserNameGoesHere]

For those who profess a particular faith or religion, how can you be sure your religion is the correct one? And even there are so many branches and sub branches and sub sub branches of religions, so how do you know your specific branch, sub-branch, sub-sub-branch, etc... is the correct one out of all of those within the same general religion?

You can say you have faith that it is so, but so do all the other people in incompatible (with your branch) branches and in incompatible (with your religion) religions. So I ask you: How do you know you made the right choice? Keep in mind that the number of people who believe a particular thing does not affect the truth value of it, in most cases.*

*

I say "in most cases" because if you tried, you could make a counter-example, but usually the truth value of a statement is independent of how many agree with it. One counter-example would be the truth value of the statement "Most people believe X". This indeed would change based on how many people believed whatever X was.

[adlp]

Originally Posted by UserNameGoesHere

For those who profess a particular faith or religion, how can you be sure your religion is the correct one? And even there are so many branches and sub branches and sub sub branches of religions, so how do you know your specific branch, sub-branch, sub-sub-branch, etc... is the correct one out of all of those within the same general religion?

i would say a lot of mainstream christians believe that if you just accept Christ as your savior then it doesn't really matter what sort of specific doctrine you practice or denomination you attend. each have their own ideas interpretations about individual things mentioned in the bible though.

i think of the bible as a nail in a 2x4 plank. the nail holds the plank down and you can spin it in any direction. mormons though, we believe in modern day prophets and modern day revelation, and through that we got the book of mormon, etc. which goes hand in hand with the bible. so it would be the 2nd nail in the plank. and the plank stays still and can't move. even though we believe our church is the "true" church on earth, we don't think the majority of people (religious or not) will be thrust down to hell. we have very different perceptions of the afterlife than every other denomination.