What church should I try?

Discussion in 'Religion Archives' started by Cris, Nov 11, 2005.

  1. davewhite04 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,236
    Cris,

    You cannot use logic to disprove God, I would have thought you'd have learned this by now. Your arguments might make some people doubt there beliefs but would that changed the world for the better?

    Your god, science, simply cannot answer all the questions. For example, if someone creates a universe one day, that would only proove that intelligence was behind it.

    I tend to agree with water, this is an ego thing.

    If you want to change some religious folks mind using logic, then talk to some suicide bombers that are currently causing chaos in the world by killing innocent people then at least your position would not be so egotistical.

    Dave
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. okinrus Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,669
    You could try non-denominational churches, but there they'd be more interested in converting you than debating you. Lutherans and Presbytarians seem too service based. Liberal churches that tend to accept people of vastly different views might also have debates, but the atheist, agnostic, and religious societies is your best bet, I think.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Cris In search of Immortality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,199
    Davewhite,

    I’m not about trying to disprove a god, but trying to encourage people to see reason.

    To have a world based on reason rather than illogic – gosh what a choice.

    But god fantasies have not and can’t answer any.

    Unless of course they only had animal instincts and were driven to it, in which case intelligence doesn’t come into it.

    And that is wrong because?

    But they take their lead from the irrational institutions they follow. If people were properly taught to think then religions wouldn’t exist and we wouldn’t have suicide bombers. The basis for their actions is religion. Remove the basis and we solve the problem.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Cris In search of Immortality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,199
    okinrus,

    Many thanks for the guidance.
     
  8. davewhite04 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,236
    Cris,


    I’m not about trying to disprove a god, but trying to encourage people to see reason.


    So you think that just because someone has faith in God they have abandoned reason in everything? How foolish.


    To have a world based on reason rather than illogic – gosh what a choice.


    I don't know what world you live in, but here in the UK we have adopted atheism with open hands(as well as other things), churches are being turned into art galleries etc. The economy is good, but what a state this country is in. I fail to see what good has come out of lack of faith in God myself, it's just pure speculation on your part.


    But god fantasies have not and can’t answer any.


    We leave science up to science. However if you want to get a theory of where we came from, then Genesis is as good as anything science has to offer.


    Unless of course they only had animal instincts and were driven to it, in which case intelligence doesn’t come into it.


    So you think it's possible for a monkey to create a universe?


    And that is wrong because?


    It's up to you what you do. I actually find debating interesting like yourself, and prefer to do it in the flesh, so hopefully you'll find like minded Christians. But if you come to the table without any interest whatsoever in listening to what people say then is that fair on the people you are debating? It's just a complete lack of respect if you ask me.


    But they take their lead from the irrational institutions they follow. If people were properly taught to think then religions wouldn’t exist and we wouldn’t have suicide bombers. The basis for their actions is religion. Remove the basis and we solve the problem.


    Listen. Many atheists/agnostics nevermind theists are not properly taught how to think, they just live their lives as best they can. Your crusade which is only targetting one religion tells me that you have got a massive chip on your shoulder and your taking it out on Christians, this is not uncommon. So we'll forget all the good religion is doing in the world(and has done) just for the actions of a few nutcases, that used it to justify their actions, good idea, the world will be like paradise with no religion, just think about it.
     
  9. c20H25N3o Shiny Heart of a Shiny Child Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,017
    So because we cannot see a graviton, we should not postulate it's existence?
    According to your logic, if it cannot be seen or measured then it does not exist right?

    peace

    c20
     
  10. KennyJC Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,936
    You would say that. But the UK is doing well. The only thing that is creating friction in society is with the way the government is trying to deal with religious muslims. And again, this just comes down to religion creating tensions in society.

    You should count yourself lucky you live in a secular nation as the facts show society is healthier as a result.
     
  11. Cris In search of Immortality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,199
    Davewhite,

    It would have been had I said that.

    Yup – the void left by abandoning religion needs to be filled with rational morality. The transition is going to be painful.

    Such fiction doesn’t represent a theory. Worse is when people assert that it is true. What is wrong with simply agreeing that we don’t know yet?

    My point is that there is no evidence to support the idea that anything complex results from intelligence. Man is our only example of intelligence and he has never built anything complex. Everything that appears complex was the result of something simpler. The evolution of the computer for example could be traced back to the time the first caveman marked a stick with his first kill. In this case intelligence isn’t the source but just one component in an evolutionary process.

    OK, yes I understand. One of my greatest failings in the past has been my tendency to side with the other person’s point of view, makes me a terrible salesman and a sucker for a strong salesman. That is my personal challenge, to control the emotional side and tackle the issue purely from the intellectual and logical. As I have said earlier, a confrontational approach cannot be effective. And it is necessary to understand the opponent.

    Agreed, most simply follow the current fashions, much like sheep or lemmings. Very few on either side give the issues serious thought.

    Or payback from my entire British school life being subjected to daily Christian worship and religious instruction. So Christian evangelists are allowed with impunity to force themselves in our faces but I’m not. Isn’t that hypocrisy on your part?

    No I have to agree that simply the removal of religion isn’t going to solve our problems. It needs to be replaced with a rational structure. The trick is to replace the crumbling crutch of religion with something substantial.
     
  12. Cris In search of Immortality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,199
    C20,

    No, you are free to speculate as much as you like, but do not assert them true until you can demonstrate some evidence.

    Disbelieving a proposition is not the same thing as believing it is false.
     
  13. genep Guest

    All religions have a problem except one. No matter where you go you are always there. Except in the church of thoughtless-silence called meditation.
    In thoughtless-silence you will sooner or later have to Realize that you need the disorder and chaos of a church or religion like a toothache.
     
  14. Cris In search of Immortality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,199
    In thoughtless silence you will not realize anything since to realize something is a thought.
     
  15. davewhite04 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,236
    The only thing that is causing social friction in the UK is the way the goverment is dealing with religious Muslims? Are you smoking pot?

    This link suggests that religion has a very small part to play in regards of crimes in the UK(Scotland in this link, but it is a fair example), in fact it isn't even mentioned. Can you provide any figures that show Christianity is causing social friction in the UK?
     
  16. davewhite04 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,236
    Cris,


    It would have been had I said that.


    Apologies, another disadvantage with debating online, so many misunderstandings arise.


    Such fiction doesn’t represent a theory. Worse is when people assert that it is true. What is wrong with simply agreeing that we don’t know yet?


    Well neither of us can be certain what did actually happen at the birth of the Universe. The difference between us is that you believe the Bible is complete fiction and I don't so obviously our opinions are going to clash.


    My point is that there is no evidence to support the idea that anything complex results from intelligence.


    Interesting. So who invented the word complex?


    Man is our only example of intelligence and he has never built anything complex.


    I would say that a telephone system is complex, but obviously you don't agree, or did I misunderstand something?


    Everything that appears complex was the result of something simpler.


    I see where you're coming from actually

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    But lets disect your example of the caveman.

    The caveman marks the number of kills he achieved in one day, on a wall.

    A computer is invented that makes this task more efficient.

    My example is short, but can you see the flaw in your example?

    I mean you could call a scientific theory "complex", we can only apply the word to us and not some super humans or gods. Newton, when the apple dropped and a moment of inspiration arose, he made it look easy but it was complex (the workings of the universe). Fair enough we didn't create the universe, but that doesn't make his work any less complex, if you see what I mean.


    OK, yes I understand. One of my greatest failings in the past has been my tendency to side with the other person’s point of view, makes me a terrible salesman and a sucker for a strong salesman.That is my personal challenge, to control the emotional side and tackle the issue purely from the intellectual and logical. As I have said earlier, a confrontational approach cannot be effective. And it is necessary to understand the opponent.


    You lost me with this reply.


    Or payback from my entire British school life being subjected to daily Christian worship and religious instruction. So Christian evangelists are allowed with impunity to force themselves in our faces but I’m not. Isn’t that hypocrisy on your part?


    It sounds like you have had a bad experience with the religion, I don't know the details but I sympathise with you, I myself never had this experience. I have got a friend who was a nervous wreck because of this Catholic school he attended when he was younger. Now he's happy, married and has kids, but the memories are still there. Is this Christianities fault? Did Jesus command that everyone must be taught the Bible in school?


    No I have to agree that simply the removal of religion isn’t going to solve our problems. It needs to be replaced with a rational structure. The trick is to replace the crumbling crutch of religion with something substantial.


    I honestly cannot see the negative patterns you see with my religion, I can see them clearly with one other specific religion but not mine. You might say I'm blinded, but what is so bad about people singing hymns together once or twice a week and doing charitable work? This is all most Christian churches I know do. If you argue you want it removed from schools, then you already have your wish, but to remove something from society actually reduces the choices people have(I have no idea what you plan to replace it with) when they are old enough to look into things like philosophy and religion for themselves.

    Just because you think it's garbage, it doesn't mean it is garbage.
     
  17. Cris In search of Immortality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,199
    DaveWhite,

    Not quite. The claims of the bible are fantasy because no one can show otherwise.

    Looks like you did misunderstand. Show me the man who invented the modern telephone system. You can’t. It wasn’t created, it evolved from simpler systems going way back to when we discovered electricity and made use of simple wires. Man’s intelligence was just a catalyst as part of that evolutionary process.

    You’ve neglected to mention the millions of years of small steps in between that forms an evolutionary process not an act of creation, i.e. the modern computer evolved and wasn’t created, and is still evolving.

    LOL, not a bad experience just a terrible waste of time and deflection of thought.

    I can provide a list but firstly why spend time believing something fervently and with conviction that cannot be shown to have any truth to it?

    But more importantly you cannot show it isn’t garbage; I’m not the one believing in it.
     
  18. davewhite04 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,236
    Cris,


    Not quite. The claims of the bible are fantasy because no one can show otherwise.


    Well based on this logic, the big bang theory is also fantasy.


    Looks like you did misunderstand. Show me the man who invented the modern telephone system. You can’t. It wasn’t created, it evolved from simpler systems going way back to when we discovered electricity and made use of simple wires. Man’s intelligence was just a catalyst as part of that evolutionary process.


    Just because one man didn't "invent" the telephone system that doesn't make it any less of a complex job for someone to create, does it? I would class the light bulb as complex, and I think Thomas Edison invented that. This is a very weak argument Cris, it is bordering on absurd.

    Do you think man now is more intelligent then they were when they built the pyramids(just out of interest)?


    You’ve neglected to mention the millions of years of small steps in between that forms an evolutionary process not an act of creation, i.e. the modern computer evolved and wasn’t created, and is still evolving.


    The first light bulb didn't evolve. Unless you try to connect it a lantern or candle

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!




    I can provide a list but firstly why spend time believing something fervently and with conviction that cannot be shown to have any truth to it?


    There is plenty of truth in it, you just choose to ignore it. Do you believe Jesus Christ actually was a historical person?


    But more importantly you cannot show it isn’t garbage; I’m not the one believing in it.


    I think I can show you it isn't all garbage actually, but if you don't open your eyes then it'll be like banging my head against a brick wall.
     
  19. Godless Objectivist Mind Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,197
    Actually it may just be fantasy, and furthermore supported by religious beliefs.

    click

    Another link: Click

    Godless
     
  20. Cris In search of Immortality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,199
    Davewhite,

    Unlike religious claims scientific theories aren’t presented as assertions of truth, they are always held as the best explanations available for observed and detected phenomena but with the full acceptance that they might be found faulty. Religious fantasies are the opposite – they are asserted as absolute truth with no allowance for contradiction.

    I’m not sure you understand the issue yet. Edison could not have completed his invention without the prior developments of glass, metals, electricity, generators, and a vast host of prior scientific and technological apparatus that he used. All he did was move the evolutionary process forward slightly.

    No I suspect there is little difference. Then why didn’t the ancient Egyptians create the modern computer since it is incredibly useful? They couldn’t because there were too many evolutionary steps still to come. Intelligence alone is just a part of evolutionary processes not a substitute. Outside of evolutionary processes intelligence is near to useless. This pretty much destroys the justification for the universe being created outside of evolution.

    I challenge you to present anything meaningfully complex that was the sole result of man’s intelligence that didn’t depend on some prior development or idea.

    There you go you are beginning to understand. All the components and equipment used to develop and test the idea of the light bulb was the result of centuries of prior evolutionary developments.

    Why not try presenting some credible evidence then rather than making mere assertions.

    No, since there is no credible historical evidence.

    Try – you have only made assertions to date. Remember that religionists gave up trying to present evidence or proofs long ago and have insisted ever since that faith was all that was needed. Faith simply means being convinced that something is true without proof – i.e. the definition of irrationality.
     
  21. davewhite04 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,236
    Cris,


    Unlike religious claims scientific theories aren’t presented as assertions of truth, they are always held as the best explanations available for observed and detected phenomena but with the full acceptance that they might be found faulty. Religious fantasies are the opposite – they are asserted as absolute truth with no allowance for contradiction.


    To be fair, both theists and atheistic scientists can come across as being full of self belief, to the point of being stubborn. I agree that scientific theories aren’t presented as assertions of truth, it’s just the people who talk about these theories that do present them as assertions of the truth, and this can be said about Bible bashers too.


    I’m not sure you understand the issue yet. Edison could not have completed his invention without the prior developments of glass, metals, electricity, generators, and a vast host of prior scientific and technological apparatus that he used. All he did was move the evolutionary process forward slightly.


    I see what you are saying and it is a fascinating subject. But just because a light bulb is made of something that already exists, doesn’t mean its any less complex.


    No I suspect there is little difference. Then why didn’t the ancient Egyptians create the modern computer since it is incredibly useful? They couldn’t because there were too many evolutionary steps still to come. Intelligence alone is just a part of evolutionary processes not a substitute. Outside of evolutionary processes intelligence is near to useless. This pretty much destroys the justification for the universe being created outside of evolution.


    I agree there is little difference. It is a good question regarding the Egyptians though… So I guess that if intelligence is a part of the evolution process then we need a few thousand or million years yet to notice a significant change in intelligence? But judging by your hopes of living forever, we are pretty much intelligent enough now to concentrate on conquering the universe possibly. Doesn’t this sudden surge of knowledge go against the theory of evolution btw?


    I challenge you to present anything meaningfully complex that was the sole result of man’s intelligence that didn’t depend on some prior development or idea.


    As the Bible said (thousands of years ago), nothing new under the Sun

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!




    Why not try presenting some credible evidence then rather than making mere assertions.


    Do you think it is possible to predict the future? I would think not… so consider the following.


    No, since there is no credible historical evidence.


    A book was written well over a thousand years ago that talked about a man called Jesus. In this book the main character(Jesus) predicted that many people will come along after he died and claim to be him.

    Today and in the past many people have strangely enough done exactly what this man said.

    If this man didn’t exist, then the author could predict the future, but how many fiction writers do you know of that can predict the future, please provide evidence.

    Someone knew the future in my opinion, and it is just complete ignorance if this isn’t considered.

    Hmm why would the author want to write books if he had this gift...


    Try – you have only made assertions to date. Remember that religionists gave up trying to present evidence or proofs long ago and have insisted ever since that faith was all that was needed. Faith simply means being convinced that something is true without proof – i.e. the definition of irrationality.


    If faith simply meant the definition of irrationality then we could remove one word from the dictionary.
     
  22. Godless Objectivist Mind Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,197
    Which Jesus was that, there were several BTW.
    click

    Jules Verne; From the Earth to the Moon
    H.G. Wells; The War in the Air (BTW this book was written before the airplane actually was invented)


    Heck when it comes to predicting the future, Nostradamus predicted lots more things than the bible.

    Godless
     
  23. Einstuck Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    169
    God's sun shines on the just and the unjust.
     

Share This Page