If every one followed the bible.. wouldn't the world be a better place?

[ThaG]

certain people need it, and if they need it, let them use it. if they're too weak minded to deal with reality as it is, let them do whatever they want to make themsevles happy as long as they're not out killing, and raping and shit.

see, the question is much bigger than Christianity or any other relgion

it's about the fundamental question about the origins of the universe and the inteligent life in it and how do we answer these questions

there can be only one truth

the "you have your truth, I have mine" attittude just doesn't work

the truth is only one, the question is what methods do you use to discover it

I can tell you that the whole universe was created 5 minutes ago, with our memories intact and you cannot say a god damn thing about it, whatever experiment or evidence you cite, I will always be able to explain it in terms of my theory without any contradicion

I hope you see it's absolutely the same with religon

Of course the universe wasn't created 5, 10, or 50 minutes ago, or at least we can never prove it because of the reasons mentioned above

How many truths do we have then?

The number of possible theories of that kind is infinite

I hope you see my point

It's all a matter of people waking up and not living in a lie

 

[I AM]

I know what you're saying. I agree, and parts of what I said relate to what you're saying.

 

[HERESY]

First answer the question why is that there are homeless people and battered women and children in juvenile facilities. The answer is in world history and religion IS one of the things to be blamed for that

Science and technology also share the blame. What is your point? But you are trying to use a fallcy to prove your argument, and I'm not going to allow it. Remember, YOU said, "the only thing religion can bring is hate and war (and it has given the world plenty of both)", so the question isn't why is that there are homeless people or if religion is to blame. The question you need to ask yourself is in regards to your statement. Is your statement of, "the only thing religion can bring is hate and war (and it has given the world plenty of both)" a statement that cannot be disputed and is 100% valid, or is it some generalization or opinion you shitted out of your brain and decided to post for 10 thousand+ people to read? That my friend is the question, and it is one that you will REFUSE to answer.

Again, you don't know me, so don't qualify me as having insufficient info.

Son, I don't need to know you to come to the conclusion that you don't have sufficient info. The only thing I need to do is read what you type, ask a question, press the reply button and wait for you to not answer. You don't have sufficent info, and proof of this may be found in this thread. Do I need to point it out?

If I hate religion, there is a reason and it is because I hate lies and religion is the BIGGEST LIE EVER.

You do hate religion, and one does not have to see you use mighty shouting words (caps) to get the impression that you don't like it. All one has to do is R-E-A-D and it will be as clear as day.

a San Diego newspaper comes with a report on new theories about the big Bang and the beginning of the universe and a reader's comment is something like this: "These stupid scientists must stop messign with what is only God's work"

But I've read worse from non-believers on this board. Your point?

Well, this type of mentality - just accepting what the religion tells you without any questioning, even things that have been proven to be wrong and things that contradict the common sense is what pisses me off

SEE ABOVE, and if you are pissed off at people for believing something that you don't believe, you should enroll in the nearest mental health facility you can find. A lot of people don't believe what I believe, and a alot of people don't believe what I believe even after I show them something that is 100% FACT, but if they don't listen or if they don't believe it, thats not on me.

It's not just because I'm a scientists, it's because people like the aforementioned person and many like him are BLOCKING THE PROGRES OF HUMANITY.

Son, how was that man blocking the progress of humanity? Does he control ANY significant amount of money? Is he part of status quo?

OK, let's shut up, be happy and stop trying to understand the laws of nature, just because we already have an explanation in the Bible; it doesn't matter that the explanation in the Bible doesn't match the observations

Son, the world does not solely consist of people who are rigid and ignorant. Many people believe that science and religion have a close relation and that one endorses the other.

Of course it's much easier to believe im God, Allah, or whatever else you believe in than to deal with abstract math or protein signaling networks

Actually, some would say it is much harder because you have nothing to go on except for faith and scriptures that have been handed down over time.

Science can't give a 100% answer now, research is an ongoing process and these answers will be found some day. You must be have very little common sense to deny the progress of science towards our better understanding of the world during the last 350 years

Read what I typed and read what I was replying to.

 

[JAPE]

I was thinking that if everyone in the whole world followed the bible..

There would be no killing, hate, aids, murder, greed hunger etc.

No there would still be aging and death... But a lot of other problems like war would not exist.

I'm not saying the world would be better if we were all one religion...
but if everyone followed the morals in the bible..
lots of problems could be avoided...

what do you think?

its not the lack of following the bible, its the cops the government the media

 

[ThaG]

Science and technology also share the blame. What is your point? But you are trying to use a fallcy to prove your argument, and I'm not going to allow it. Remember, YOU said, "the only thing religion can bring is hate and war (and it has given the world plenty of both)", so the question isn't why is that there are homeless people or if religion is to blame. The question you need to ask yourself is in regards to your statement. Is your statement of, "the only thing religion can bring is hate and war (and it has given the world plenty of both)" a statement that cannot be disputed and is 100% valid, or is it some generalization or opinion you shitted out of your brain and decided to post for 10 thousand+ people to read? That my friend is the question, and it is one that you will REFUSE to answer.

The countries with the highest quality of living are the ones with the least percentage of believers; you can check the stats

a correlation is found between the number of believers and the homicide rate, STDs and low quality of life

for more info:

http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005-11.html

SEE ABOVE, and if you are pissed off at people for believing something that you don't believe, you should enroll in the nearest mental health facility you can find. A lot of people don't believe what I believe, and a alot of people don't believe what I believe even after I show them something that is 100% FACT, but if they don't listen or if they don't believe it, thats not on me.

what I believe is what is scientifically proven (or what is supported by the overwhleming evidence available, you can absolutely prove things only in math and pure logic)

what I don't believe is what is scientifically disproven (or what ithe overwhleming evidence available is against)

Son, how was that man blocking the progress of humanity? Does he control ANY significant amount of money? Is he part of status quo?

that man is a representative of 92% of people in the most powerful country in the world...

Son, the world does not solely consist of people who are rigid and ignorant. Many people believe that science and religion have a close relation and that one endorses the other.

read my post aobve about how many truths one can believe in

there is no such thing as science and religion coexsiting;

one of our goals is to minimize the number of ignorant people and religion is a major obstacle

Actually, some would say it is much harder because you have nothing to go on except for faith and scriptures that have been handed down over time.

I think you understand you just killed yourslef with this statement

 

[ThaG]

how do you qualify this:

Grand Canyon National Park is not permitted to give an official estimate of the geologic age of its principal feature, due to pressure from Bush administration appointees. Despite promising a prompt review of its approval for a book claiming the Grand Canyon was created by Noah's flood rather than by geologic forces, more than three years later no review has ever been done and the book remains on sale at the park, according to documents released today by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER).

"In order to avoid offending religious fundamentalists, our National Park Service is under orders to suspend its belief in geology," stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch. "It is disconcerting that the official position of a national park as to the geologic age of the Grand Canyon is 'no comment.'"

In a letter released today, PEER urged the new Director of the National Park Service (NPS), Mary Bomar, to end the stalling tactics, remove the book from sale at the park and allow park interpretive rangers to honestly answer questions from the public about the geologic age of the Grand Canyon. PEER is also asking Director Bomar to approve a pamphlet, suppressed since 2002 by Bush appointees, providing guidance for rangers and other interpretive staff in making distinctions between science and religion when speaking to park visitors about geologic issues.

In August 2003, Park Superintendent Joe Alston attempted to block the sale at park bookstores of Grand Canyon: A Different View by Tom Vail, a book claiming the Canyon developed on a biblical rather than an evolutionary time scale. NPS Headquarters, however, intervened and overruled Alston. To quiet the resulting furor, NPS Chief of Communications David Barna told reporters and members of Congress that there would be a high-level policy review of the issue.

According to a recent NPS response to a Freedom of Information Act request filed by PEER, no such review was ever requested, let alone conducted or completed.

Park officials have defended the decision to approve the sale of Grand Canyon: A Different View, claiming that park bookstores are like libraries, where the broadest range of views are displayed. In fact, however, both law and park policies make it clear that the park bookstores are more like schoolrooms rather than libraries. As such, materials are only to reflect the highest quality science and are supposed to closely support approved interpretive themes. Moreover, unlike a library the approval process is very selective. Records released to PEER show that during 2003, Grand Canyon officials rejected 22 books and other products for bookstore placement while approving only one new sale item -- the creationist book.

Ironically, in 2005, two years after the Grand Canyon creationist controversy erupted, NPS approved a new directive on "Interpretation and Education (Director's Order #6) which reinforces the posture that materials on the "history of the Earth must be based on the best scientific evidence available, as found in scholarly sources that have stood the test of scientific peer review and criticism [and] Interpretive and educational programs must refrain from appearing to endorse religious beliefs explaining natural processes."

"As one park geologist said, this is equivalent of Yellowstone National Park selling a book entitled Geysers of Old Faithful: Nostrils of Satan," Ruch added, pointing to the fact that previous NPS leadership ignored strong protests from both its own scientists and leading geological societies against the agency approval of the creationist book. "We sincerely hope that the new Director of the Park Service now has the autonomy to do her job."

 

[|GOD|||ZILLA|]

why's does it have to be the bible.. why not the gita or somethin' else.. is it because indians didn't rape your ancestors and force them to believe in what they do.

fucken witnesses came to my house today., but i didn't open the door.. why do people try to push there religion onto others. what do they have to gain.


edit:.. that grand canyon shit is amazing.

 

[ThaG]

...or this

Scientist Fights Church Effort to Hide Museum's Pre-Human Fossils

Famed paleoanthropologist Richard Leakey is giving no quarter to powerful evangelical church leaders who are pressing Kenya's national museum to relegate to a back room its world-famous collection of hominid fossils showing the evolution of humans' early ancestors.

Leakey called the churches' plans "the most outrageous comments I have ever heard."

He told The Daily Telegraph (London): "The National Museums of Kenya should be extremely strong in presenting a very forceful case for the evolutionary theory of the origins of mankind. The collection it holds is one of Kenya's very few global claims to fame and it must be forthright in defending its right to be at the forefront of this branch of science." Leakey was for years director of the museum and of Kenya's entire museum system.

The museum's collections include the most complete skeleton yet found of Homo erectus, the 1.7-million-year-old Turkana Boy unearthed by Leakey's team in 1984 near Lake Turkana in northern Kenya.

The museum also holds bones from several specimens of Australopithecus anamensis, believed to be the first hominid to walk upright, four million years ago. Together the artifacts amount to the clearest record yet discovered of the origins of Homo sapiens.

Leaders of Kenya's Pentecostal congregation, with six million adherents, want the human fossils de-emphasized.

"The Christian community here is very uncomfortable that Leakey and his group want their theories presented as fact," said Bishop Bonifes Adoyo, head of the largest Pentecostal church in Kenya, the Christ is the Answer Ministries.

"Our doctrine is not that we evolved from apes, and we have grave concerns that the museum wants to enhance the prominence of something presented as fact which is just one theory," the bishop said.

Bishop Adoyo said all the country's churches would unite to force the museum to change its focus when it reopens after eighteen months of renovations in June 2007. "We will write to them, we will call them, we will make sure our people know about this, and we will see what we can do to make our voice known," he said.

It was these comments Leakey termed outrageous. Calling members of the Pentecostal church fundamentalists, Leakey added: "Their theories are far, far from the mainstream on this. They cannot be allowed to meddle with what is the world's leading collection of these types of fossils."

For its part, the museum sounded like it was trying to walk a tightrope. It said it was in a "tricky situation" in trying to redesign its exhibition space for all kinds of visitors.

"We have a responsibility to present all our artifacts in the best way that we can so that everyone who sees them can gain a full understanding of their significance," said Ali Chege, public relations manager for the National Museums of Kenya. "But things can get tricky when you have religious beliefs on one side, and intellectuals, scientists, or researchers on the other, saying the opposite.

 

[I AM]

why's does it have to be the bible.. why not the gita or somethin' else.. .

good point, the new testament was written hundreds of years after jesus supposedly died or whatever...which can't even be proven.

i mean, Buddhism was around before that, and has WAY better principles...and you don't see HALF as many Buddhists freaking about about stupid shit like Christians and Catholics...although, that could be media influence too..

it doesn't matter what book it is, weak minded people just need guidelines on how to live their life so they can feel happy about accomplishing something that some unknowable entity created so they don't kill themselves....it gives IGNORANT people reasons to stay alive, when they should just DIE and let the SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST come back as the way of life.

 

[MEXCOM]

The countries with the highest quality of living are the ones with the least percentage of believers; you can check the stats

a correlation is found between the number of believers and the homicide rate, STDs and low quality of life

for more info:

http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005-11.html

And this proves what? That the people that inhabit these countries are somehow better than those who inhabit countries that are more religious? Or that because they are not blinded by religion these countries are somehow more advanced and illuminated? LOL!

Did you forget who these countries are?

France? Sweden? Germany? Australia? Canada?

Let's take Australias for instance since they probably have the 2nd best level of living in the world.

Their terror laws passed in 2005 are probably just as oppressive, if not more, than those of the United States. The White English Aussies still harbor racism towards other [Asians, Muslims, Blacks]. Or their treatment of the Natives that inhabited the country before the white "settlers."

Or how about another of those countries. Let's choose an easy one, let's do France. I like France. They really don't like the United States.

France. Didn't they sell weapons to Iraq, to China, to Isreal, to Mexico?

Didn't they just experience a few riots due to their largely anti-Muslim sentiments? Isn't France one of the worlds largest powers in the world? Yet they have nuclear missles. Doesn't France pride themselves on being a cilivized country and one of the few countries that upholds democracy? Well then why did they basically fund a terrorist state by aiding Eyadema?

Same goes for "Theistic" countries. Two of the richest in the world: Mexico and the US. Those are the 1st and 4th who produce more billionares than anywhere else in the world. Yet one of them has one of the highest levels of living and the other has only a rich and a lower class, no middle.

But at the very least your point doesn't seem to prove anything either way. So why waste our times by pointing that out? Did it actually have some sourt of revelance? I mean I *know* you weren't trying to prove to HERESY that these countries are actually advantaged because they have less believers, did you?

 

[MEXCOM]

good point, the new testament was written hundreds of years after jesus supposedly died or whatever...which can't even be proven.

i mean, Buddhism was around before that, and has WAY better principles...and you don't see HALF as many Buddhists freaking about about stupid shit like Christians and Catholics...although, that could be media influence too..

it doesn't matter what book it is, weak minded people just need guidelines on how to live their life so they can feel happy about accomplishing something that some unknowable entity created so they don't kill themselves....it gives IGNORANT people reasons to stay alive, when they should just DIE and let the SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST come back as the way of life.

What always bugged me about Buddha was that he was a rich prince. and one day he saw poor people, and sick people, and old people and instead of using that money to feed and clothe them, he ran away and stood under a tree.

 

[I AM]

Was he? Sidhartha or whatever his name was? Ok, next religion...how about Hinduism? lol....

Let's go through the list and see which religions were started by stupid pieces of shit...

so far we have Catholicism, Christianity, and Buddhism.

btw, if anyone says Jesus started Christianity, I hope you die tomorrow.

 

[HERESY]

^lol

 

[HERESY]

The countries with the highest quality of living are the ones with the least percentage of believers; you can check the stats

a correlation is found between the number of believers and the homicide rate, STDs and low quality of life

for more info:

http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005-11.html

Mexcom flushed this down the drain. No need for me to even address it.

what I believe is what is scientifically proven (or what is supported by the overwhleming evidence available, you can absolutely prove things only in math and pure logic)

what I don't believe is what is scientifically disproven (or what ithe overwhleming evidence available is against)

What does all of that have to do with the fact that you said you get pissed? Son, I am addressing the fact that you get pissed because of what others believe. I couldn't care less about what you believe. I couldn't care less about what ANYONE believes. However, unlike myself, you are letting the beliefs of others upset you and thats what we are talking about here.

that man is a representative of 92% of people in the most powerful country in the world...

That man is a representative of NO ONE but himself. On what grounds can you say he reperesents 92% of the united states? Again, how is this man blocking the progress of humanity?

read my post aobve about how many truths one can believe in

Your post above makes no sense.

there is no such thing as science and religion coexsiting;

one of our goals is to minimize the number of ignorant people and religion is a major obstacle

http://www.christianpost.com/articl...ientists_Team_Up_to_Battle_Global_Warming.htm

Your entire rant = :dead:

(btw, the ORIGINAL article was posted on MSN, YAHOO and CNN.)

I think you understand you just killed yourslef with this statement

Absolutely not. Learn to R-E-A-D, before you respond. Here let me show you how you just killed yourself by not reading:

Actually, some would say it is much harder because you have nothing to go on except for faith and scriptures that have been handed down over time.

Pay attention to the underlined word in bold, then come back and tell me the difference between creationalism and intelligent design and which school of thought believes historical and archaeological evidence supports the bible. :dead:

 

[ThaG]

http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/your-delusion.htm

 

[ThaG]

Actually, some would say it is much harder because you have nothing to go on except for faith and scriptures that have been handed down over time.

This sentence doesn't make any sense except for trying to say there is nothing in support of religion besides faith and scriptures both of which don't mean shit to the rational mind

 

[ThaG]

http://www.christianpost.com/articl...ientists_Team_Up_to_Battle_Global_Warming.htm

this is a step in the right direction but the question remains and it is "What is the government doing about it and how deos it support its claims"

anyway:

see, the question is much bigger than Christianity or any other relgion

it's about the fundamental question about the origins of the universe and the inteligent life in it and how do we answer these questions

there can be only one truth

the "you have your truth, I have mine" attittude just doesn't work

the truth is only one, the question is what methods do you use to discover it

I can tell you that the whole universe was created 5 minutes ago, with our memories intact and you cannot say a god damn thing about it, whatever experiment or evidence you cite, I will always be able to explain it in terms of my theory without any contradicion

I hope you see it's absolutely the same with religon

Of course the universe wasn't created 5, 10, or 50 minutes ago, or at least we can never prove it because of the reasons mentioned above

How many truths do we have then?

The number of possible theories of that kind is infinite

I hope you see my point

It's all a matter of people waking up and not living in a lie

religion must be erased from the face of the Earth, because it's not true, simple and plain

 

[HERESY]

This sentence doesn't make any sense except for trying to say there is nothing in support of religion besides faith and scriptures both of which don't mean shit to the rational mind

This is pure foolishness on your part. How can you start your madness off by saying it doesn't make any sense, yet....you know what forget it. LOL!

this is a step in the right direction but the question remains and it is "What is the government doing about it and how deos it support its claims"

Son, we are not concerned with what the hell the government is doing about it, at least in this convo we aren't. We are dealing with YOUR claim that, "there is no such thing as science and religion coexsiting". Son, that link shatters your claim, and it simply validates my previous claim that you type madness, make hasty generalizations, avoid questions and rely on insufficient info when presenting your views.

At least I can discuss these things with some of the more intelligent atheists and science aficionados, but you have bastardized atheism and made a mockery of science and you do so because you rejoice in stupidity and hatred.

religion must be erased from the face of the Earth, because it's not true, simple and plain

So it is comparable to many of the statements you made in this thread? Good. Why don't you lead by example and erase your madness from this thread, and I'll start the movement for removing religion from the earth.

 

[ThaG]

Son, we are not concerned with what the hell the government is doing about it, at least in this convo we aren't. We are dealing with YOUR claim that, "there is no such thing as science and religion coexsiting". Son, that link shatters your claim, and it simply validates my previous claim that you type madness, make hasty generalizations, avoid questions and rely on insufficient info when presenting your views.

At least I can discuss these things with some of the more intelligent atheists and science aficionados, but you have bastardized atheism and made a mockery of science and you do so because you rejoice in stupidity and hatred.:

again, a single "collaboration" which I don't even know how serious is (because I supose it comes form those "Let bridge the gap between relgion and science" morons), is what it is - a single collaboration to solve a common problem

when I say science and religion are incompatible, I mean that we as humanity cannot use both philosophies in the same time because there is no such thing as two different truths

you blame me for not answering yuor questions but I posted a lot of stuff you just ignored because you have nothing to say about it and you just avoid answering uncomfortable questions

 

[HERESY]

again, a single "collaboration" which I don't even know how serious is, is what it is - a single collaboration to solve a common problem

Doesn't matter. Your initial claim was science and religion cannot coexist. That link murdered your statement.

when I say science and religion are incompatible, I mean that we as humanity cannot use both philosophies in the same time because there is no such thing as two different truths

Again, tell me the difference between creationalism and intelligent design and which school of thought believes historical and archaeological evidence supports the bible.

No matter which way you spin it you won't be able to save yourself.

you blame me for not answering yuor questions but I posted a lot of stuff you just ignored because you have nothing to say about it and you just avoid answering uncomfortable questions

What questions do you want me to answer? Post them and I will do my best to provide an answer, and after I do so, I want you to answer the questions I have presented thus far. If I answer your questions, but you fail to answer mine, will you leave the board for six months? I'm not requiring a correct answer, but what I am requiring is a logical answer that has some validity or supports your belief. If you can't do this shut your mouth and sit in a corner with your chemistry set.