interesting point.. but the Jewish god has no son either, neither do the jews believe in the trinity.. yet they are said to believe in the same GOD.. incidentaly christians and muslims in the lands where jesus preached the gospel call GOD "ALLAH"
evolution is a Fact, a theory is How it happens,we dont believe it we KNOW it happens,big difference. here you go www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html
" Isn't religion a bit stupid?" No. Christianity, Islam, Judaism, and some others are. By no means EVERY religion. check out "Eastern Philosophy"
Originally posted by scorpius "evolution is a Fact, a theory is How it happens,we dont believe it we KNOW it happens,big difference. here you go" A fact! Boy, I'm a biochemist and know about it,even the most extreme defender of the theory can not claim it to be fact, but if your not convinced check this site: http://www.harunyahya.com/c_refutation_darwinism.php Hope to have helped in Clearing the picture.
Originally posted by Sushupti "No. Christianity, Islam, Judaism, and some others are. By no means EVERY religion. check out "Eastern Philosophy"" On what bases is your claim, are you someone who happens to know about all the three religions and all their sects?......... sorry!! I doubt you have such knowledge in these religions, no body can make such a claim. I already did give an example on Islamic sects which clearly you did not read. And to move along with your game, in what sense is "Eastern philosophy not stupid" that is if we were to claim that the statement is correct (which is totaly wrong)? Here is a question to begin with: What proof has Eastern philosophy on the existance of multiple gods? What is their proof on the existance ofincarnation? You, also, are a beleiver; hence, according to the first post on the threed, your religious thought is also condemmed of some degree of stupidity (which I beleive he is totaly mistaken about it). May we all be shown the Truth. Salam.
Is religion stupid? Yes. It was created in a time when humans didn't know about the world around them. Eventually, people actually started to believe the bullshit that sprung from thier mouths. This led to organized religion. Evolution is the most viable theory to explain life, and this is why it is accepted in (almost) every school system as a textbook standard lesson.
I can and I will. I do in fact know about these three religions. Sects and specifics are of course a different matter, but I'm familiar with the core of all three, yes. I used to think they were interesting... till I read enough, that is Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! And my 'problem' with the big three is exactly at that very core, the 'givens,' including some things all three agree on (GASP!). I will make sure I read it eventually, but in case you mean sufis, I do think they're pretty cool. That's the twist I guess. I'm sure many sects and whatnots have some very cool facets, I don't argue that. The core, however, is in my eyes rotten and stupid. This sounds a lot like an offense, but I wish it didn't. I assure you, for example, that I'm WAY less prejudiced against Islam than a lot of the people arguing FOR abrahamic religions. There's more I like about it than the others, and it's the only one I even consider studying further, for the details and variations still untainted by the core. As for my defense of the east, they don't have the things I most despise about abrahamics... for example, an idiot god who desperately needs groupies. And the blatant disregard for laws like cause and effect. Again this may sound a bit harsh, please try not to take it as such. My ideas may sound a bit radical, but i'm not a radical person myself. Basically, Eastern philosophies are more in line with wisdom, westerners like to simply submit to something they can't see because they were told to. This, to me, is one of the best examples of Pure Stupidity. Of course, there are variations on the theme, like for example bhakti yogis... but I prefer to simply ignore them. No proof, but that's the religion part, I'm defending the philosophy. The concept of reincarnation makes infinitely more sense than anything non-atheist out there, though, I must say. At any rate, they're less about simply believing, more about finding out for yourself. It's what meditation is. I am in fact not a believer, I'm sorry I gave you that impression. I'm not in any way asian, either, for the record. Brazillian of 100% european descent, though I wouldn't put it past some of those farther back europeans to have some arab in them, Ottoman Empire and all... This means that by his definition of stupid, I'm not even slightly Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Your signature, however, I wholeheartedly agree with! May we all be shown the Truth. As-Salaam-Alaikum, Om Shanti Om. [EDIT: I see on your profile you're from Lebanon! I love Lebanon, intuitively, but know sadly little about it... I would appreciate it if you could direct me to some reading material]
"Faith is the sacrifice in which God most delights, the sacrifice of the intellect. " Exactly. God got very angry when Adam and Eve ate from the tree of knowledge. Doesn't it occur to people that anyone writing a book about God, where he punished his children for eating from the tree of knowledge, must be anti-knowledge, and extremely oppressive? This is why we need the Humanist Revolution more than ever. To me, truth is the divine element in our universe.
In my opinion religion is childish. If you met an adult who believed in Santa, the Easter Bunny, the Toothfairy, wouldn't you be a bit surprised? Yet people believe in god for the same reasons: because they want to, because it makes life seem nicer, because they feel they need to. A good portion of society has recognised science. It is time for the rest to grow up as well. This might be painful for a couple of generations, but then we will be more mature as a human race.
Hi looks like everyone are givong just opinions but no porrf any statements. Yes I am a Christian, and I do belive there is a God, but I also know you cant prove God's existance, and on the other hand you cant disporve it either. In basically comes down to you yourself have to choose which bias is the best bias to be biased with. My fisrt question is how did everything come into existance? How did matter, energy, and information as we know it appear? From cosmology (astronomical not philosphical) we can, no we must conclude that the universe had a beginning. We also get taught matter cannot be created nor destroyed, but only converted into energy and back from energy to matter (Einstein's equivalncy eqaution). Even Steven Hawking said in the ending of his book that cosmologically there has to be a creator, but he chooses not to allow that thought even to enter into his mind because then he must consider that creator or God. The late Steven J Gould said somthing very similar when he refered to evolution, say its not science vs religion but rather the religion of materliasim vs christianity. I'll contstruck a more loigal argument next time its been interisting to read all of this thankx soo much jako
Still, it doesn't contradict the idea of some kind of creator/intelligence that created all. It still doesn't explain the cause(I'm not talking about afterlife/heaven/hell!). In fact, maybe science will never be able to. That may be because it relies on the physical life, when in fact a creator cannot be physical because then it would mean that something created It. I'm just speculating here. I don't take comfort in the Idea of a God, or fear death. By observing life, one is always likely to come up with such conclusion that a creator made the universe. And obviously he can not be of matter.. That doesn't help... Again, lets put all the mythological context affiliated with God aside for a sec. I want to see what the replies are to psycho's post. What is in the background of space? Maybe by hypothesizing we may figure out a reasonable explanation.
I find the "there had to be a creator!" argument extremely annoying and dumb, due to the old "well then who created god?" problem. I also think it's thouroughly irrelevant, and can have no practical effect in our life. The christian god specifically, is just a retarded idea that doens't make a single droplet of sense, of course... this isn't avery productive thing to say, I realize, but there's nothing i would dread more than someone thinking any word of mine is in anyway defending that retarded, stupid invention and/or sick dumb asshole. [I find it important to put emphasis to the fact that I support him in no way... And it's an insult to the idea, not the misguided souls who believe it. Keeping with the godwin rule, I'm sure many nazis truly believed they were doing good.]
Why can't people just sit on the fence? Thats what I do. I am actually pretty 50/50 on wether the universe was 'created' by some form of intelligence OR it could've just been some natural occurrence which is part of a grand scheme of things. This is why I find religion rather sickening, it claims to know all of these things about our 'god' but in fact, no religion on Earth is close to knowing a single bit of information about this creator. Worship God? What for? Maybe he ain't that nice of a guy. In fact shouldn't we all be a little pissed off at him for creating a place where life is possible then giving us no idea what it is all about? If I could meet 'God', I wouldn't fall to my knees and pray, I would ask him was the f*** he thought he was playing at! But of course, there is always the comforting reality that we are REAL and that the place we lived in was not created by intelligence. Which if true, we should all just walk around shrugging.
is religion stupid. could it be called anything else, no. would you say that anybody who actuelly believe's in santa claus is rational, no. so why would anybody think, believing in a god, would be any less irrational. if it effects the five sense, and has a solid base it's believable otherwise it's not.
well, just a quick reply to the anti there has to be a creator. We live in a time based universe cause and effect (or rather the law of non-contradiction as i would have explained if i had time to but unfortunately i have to go to university right now) plays a part in our universe. For someone infinte which there has to be if we follow the lwas of cause and effect to it logical conclusion, these laws will no longer apply, if we make just 1 assumtion that this Creator is outside time. So either there exista and infinitely big and powerfull cause, or there exists a Cause which is outside time.
The only 'creator' theories that make an inkling of sense are shit from Videogames (Starcraft & Halo) and from Aztec/Incan/Indian legend, interestingly enough. Quezacotl. Khala. Forerunner. Whatever you want to call 'em, they are probably the same thing.
Why must the universe need a creator? Maybe it was always here. If there can exist a creator, then there must exist a creator's creator (and, thus, multiple gods -making polytheism more logical than monotheism) unless this alleged creator always existed. If that can be possible, then so can the possibility that a universe always existed. Therefore, we have no need for a creator in a universe that always existed. People have no problem imagining infinity when it deals with going forward in time. Why, then, cannot time be infinitely backward? If there is a god/creator, it certainly isn't the anthropomorphic deity that is produced by Judeo-Christian mythology. Mostly since biblical record is so fraught with contradictions and fallacies as well as outright fabrications and plagerisms of other cultures. BTW, Quetzalcoatl isn't a god of creation - he was the son of Ometecutli and Omecihuatl (the god and goddess of duality) who created all life.
I'm sure the universe has always existed (although it doesn't really exist) Existence (universe/everything) having a beginning or an end, doesn't make sense. There cannot be a first cause.. Time cannot start somewhere in time, neither can the universe. Time and the universe are the same thing, hence you cannot explain the universe within time. No logical human can say that time exists by itself.. it is merely a sensation of the mind. And this is true for the sensation of matter also. Quantum physics states that matter comes from mind. If it is true in the "micro world", then it is true for the macro world also. Physicists only believe in what is observed, created. They can never believe in the creator, the observer. If there is no "observer" (consciousness), there is no universe. To separate the observed from the observer is to put an end to all logic. The LOGIC discovered here is the manifestation of the evident identity of natures between our reason and matter. A human can not be conscious of something outside his consciuosness, because everything is inside his consciousness, inside his mind. If I am conscious of something, it is proof that it is part of my consciousness. So, all apparent material reality is spiritual. And this goes without saying, because everything we call matter is a sensation: of resistance, of impenetrability, of density, of inertia; and this sensation is purely mental. Nothing, ever, has been able to prove the existence of the most minute morsel of matter. We've known this ever since HERMES Trismegistos ("the universe is mental"), and long before, and it has been confirmed by many philosophers since DESCARTES. But physicists are not yet ready to accept anything that calls into question the very foundations of their science. Because, if we take note of Heisenberg, we realize that if we do Physics (which consists in considering the observed world as being " external "), we cannot understand anything about the universe: have you ever seen a cause? We cannot find the cause by observing effects. What is visible is the result of a cause. There is no visible cause. The God of the Bible makes himself visible through all the things in the universe, which are his bodies. It only seems so because they speak of the same things. They can't just invent new things that never happened. Like the flood for instance, sumerians weren't the only ones who wrote about that event, of course not.
That's what I was tryign to get at with my post; pardon my ineloquence. Sure doesn't sound like the YHVH I know.. you're mixing in some of that hermetic philosophy, which actually makes sense, with your irrational beliefs Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Interesting thing about that: An aztec legend details Ol' Quetz crashing into a lake while riding a flaming cloud. Doesn't this sound a bit like a damaged alien spacecraft crashing into a lake. Also, some tales from India detail an earth-bound war between gods that sounds an awful lot like spacecraft blasting each other with lasers. I saw it on history channel. Very strange, but interestingly tangible.
