NB's View: Religion

[Uzumaki Macho]

Exactly!, point is we humans don't Much About our universe or even our own planet to make idiotic comments such as saying "There is a God".

Fixed your post.

 

[Punk Hazard]

Illogical

This one actually makes me laugh. Think about it. Scientists really don't know as much as we give them credit for. We accept them as logical views thus they must be right...wrong. Just think about this. After a big explosion a perfect sized and aged sun with a spherical "design" is just a perfect distance from another spherically "designed" sphere that jus happens to have the proponents for life. Life just so happens to form on this planet along with various complex systems like photosynthesis, carbon cycle, water cycle (to replenish our resources), humans are even more complex.. I mean we can go on forever about the brain and dna.

It actually doesn't work this way. Life didn't just so happen to develop on the planet with the perfect size and the perfect resources at the perfect distance away from the perfect sun. Life isn't spawning on all planets and then dying off because oh noes, this planet isn't perfect Earth is. Life didn't accidentally spawn on Earth and got lucky that all of Earth's resources were perfect for life.

Life spawned on Earth BECAUSE it had the conditions perfect for life. Life didn't just so happen to form on Earth, and the sun didn't just so happen to form perfectly after a big explosion. Over the course of BILLIONS of years the universe formed. Last time I checked, scientists don't have a billion years in a laboratory, so it's foolish to think that being unable to create life in a lab with matter means life didn't form as a product of nature and by chance, and not by intelligent design. Bear in mind that while the universe is 14 billion years old, the sun is only 4 billion years old, so the sun also didn't just pop out ready to go.

 

[ComplexCity]

I was asleep...

Edit: No wait, I was awake when you sent that and playing The Last of Us.[

Excuses excuses

There's nothing in your last post worth replying to.

Dang you took all the straws and now you want more?

Morality is taught doggy. I guess the better question I should have asked since you don't read for anything is where morals orginiated from and I'd like to see scientific evidence as well

Also, your post is nothing but a study which doesn't make it a fact. You also have to prove that earlier humans had the intelligence to tell right from wrong. But I know you won't :bdpf:

Fixed your post.

There's still grammatical errors with the post. Doesn't look like you fixed a thing

 

[Marin]

It's funny how there are more posts of members bashing each other than actually debating the topic at hand.

 

[Punk Hazard]

It's funny how there are more posts of members bashing each other than actually debating the topic at hand.

The ComplexCity effect

 

[Marin]

The ComplexCity effect

It takes 2 sides to have a fight tough. If someone's a nuisance just report him, the infractions will shut them up.

 

[ComplexCity]

The ComplexCity effect

Where in my posts do you see bashing? You act as if you don't call memebers logic stupid or insult ppl. You gonna stop playing the Last of Us and answer the question?

 

[Punk Hazard]

It takes 2 sides to have a fight tough. If someone's a nuisance just report him, the infractions will shut them up.

Only takes one person to be petty

Where in my posts do you see bashing? You act as if you don't call memebers logic stupid or insult ppl. You gonna stop playing the Last of Us and answer the question?

Ironic you're going Helen Keller to your Helen Keller jabs.

I already linked evidence that there is a correlation between morality and biological aspects of the brain, suggesting that morality, or at least the capacity for it, is rooted in the human mind and is fully capable of being developed by human beings.

 

[ComplexCity]

Only takes one person to be petty

You always have to be right

Grow up, you always quote me when I'm not even talking to you but you insist you have to interject based off your arrogance. No one is petty

Ironic you're going Helen Keller to your Helen Keller jabs

Except that's not an insult? You act like you don't read and you act like you don't listen. I'll be gladly to say that but I think the Helen Keller pun was more clever :bdpf:

I already linked evidence that there is a correlation between morality and biological aspects of the brain, suggesting that morality, or at least the capacity for it, is rooted in the human mind and is fully capable of being developed by human beings.

It's a study, not a fact. I also asked you where it originated from to which you still did not respond. Once again, you have to prove that early humans had the intelligence to distinguish right from wrong which will be hard to do with a theory

 

[Punk Hazard]

You always have to be right

Grow up, you always quote me when I'm not even talking to you but you insist you have to interject based off your arrogance. No one is petty

That's not the pettiness.

It's a study, not a fact. I also asked you where it originated from to which you still did not respond. Once again, you have to prove that early humans had the intelligence to distinguish right from wrong which will be hard to do with a theory

Okay? It's a fact that when using morality, areas in their brains reacted, which INDICATES a biological connection to morality. Surely this will help you differentiate between fact(brain reacted to morals) and claim(morals are rooted in our brains). That's how evidence works. You make a claim, and then provide facts that indicates so. That's what I did.

Also, this will help you find what you're looking for. Click the sources:

You must be registered for see links

Do you have evidence that morals did not originate from humans?

 

[ComplexCity]

That's not the pettiness.

Never said it was

Okay? It's a fact that when using morality, areas in their brains reacted, which INDICATES a biological connection to morality. Surely this will help you differentiate between fact(brain reacted to morals) and claim(morals are rooted in our brains). That's how evidence works. You make a claim, and then provide facts that indicates so. That's what I did.

Taken from your article

"Although the neural mechanisms underlying moral deliberation and moral intuition may differ, these have not been directly compared"


The article refers that there is change in the brain. Not something I was disputing from the get go. I asked you the origin and whether or not early humans had the intelligence to prove what was moral and immoral, to which you still have not provided evidence for

Do you have evidence that morals did not originate from humans?

The burden of proof is always on the person making a claim. It is not up to everyone else to prove you wrong. It is impractical

 

[Uzumaki Macho]

Never said it was







Taken from your article

"Although the neural mechanisms underlying moral deliberation and moral intuition may differ, these have not been directly compared"


The article refers that there is change in the brain. Not something I was disputing from the get go. I asked you the origin and whether or not early humans had the intelligence to prove what was moral and immoral, to which you still have not provided evidence for





The burden of proof is always on the person making a claim. It is not up to everyone else to prove you wrong. It is impractical

Religious people are making the claim that religion created our morals, so they have to prove it.

 

[Multiply]

Illogical

This one actually makes me laugh. Think about it. Scientists really don't know as much as we give them credit for. We accept them as logical views thus they must be right...wrong. Just think about this. After a big explosion a perfect sized and aged sun with a spherical "design" is just a perfect distance from another spherically "designed" sphere that jus happens to have the proponents for life. Life just so happens to form on this planet along with various complex systems like photosynthesis, carbon cycle, water cycle (to replenish our resources), humans are even more complex.. I mean we can go on forever about the brain and dna. I could look at something as simple as a sandal and everyone would agree it had some sort of design thus a designer, but something as complex as life and the universe is an accident? Okay. Moreover, even if you believe in the Big Bang theory how did all of this matter suddenly give us personality and the ability to think. I can mash up matter all day in a lab but its suddenly not going to start having a personalilty on its own. Hell we even have to "design" robots to emulate human speech let alone emotion. Never can we just get all the parts for a robot and hope it suddenly starts to feel on its own. This is because we aren't an accident. We have a soul.

Here I was thinking you'd actually know what you were talking about. Alas, I was wrong.

For some reason you think because you don't understand something, then God did it.

Why would you type this big ass wall of text if you didn't know what you were saying. This is my second edit and now I'm genuinely confused and you have amused me.

 

[Omega]

I'm sorry, but this part of your this portion of your comment is a horrendous argument. It's as if you are using the "Pascal's Wager" argument. I'm sorry, but Pascal's Wager is not a convincing reason for a non-religious person to become religious. Why? Pascal's Wager is predicated on the fact that there is a clear cut dichotomy between being religious and being an atheist. In other words, you either have a choice between believing in a single God, or disbelieving in him. Reality is not so straightforward. There are other religions besides Christianity like Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Sikhism, Hinduism, Jainism etc(as you know) Each religion has non-negligible differences with the other. By following one religion to the strict letter of the law, you are more than likely disobeying the rules of another religion and may possibly go to hell under that religion's rules. So you see, "statistically speaking"(I use quotations since it's horrible to mingle statistics with religion) it's not "more logical" or " much safer" for an atheist to suddenly follow your religion, unless you can prove beyond any reasonable doubt that your religion is the right one and all the others are wrong.

I will say though, that besides this part of your post, the rest was very good.

Thanks for reading and saying my post was good. Makes me happy. I can understand your point. I merely wanted to focus on christinaity because that's what I have the most experience with and one that I often see come up when its no religion vs religion. It usually winds up Christian vs Athiest even if it doesn't start or is intended to be that way. Sorry bout that. I do think it couldn't hurt to believe in something though. I won't go into if it helps morality because unfortunately I know a lot of people who say they are Christians who are selfish and etc, and I've known a lot of good athiests.

So, when you, a lifetime christian die, what will you say to Allah when he asks you why you followed the wrong religion?

The Pascals wager argument is a false dichotomy, because it claims that the only options are either No God or The Christian God. It fails to take into account the existance of other religions. There is still a lose situation for the Theist.

Like I said, I think I gave myself a better chance then someone who follows nothing. Pascals is not the strongest argument but it has its merits. I was just tackling the "illogical stereotype". I can accept that people disagree with that argument.

What if I say you made my day?

Its what I'm here for. xD I'm actually surprised people read it. When I write that much ppl usually pay no mind.

It actually doesn't work this way. Life didn't just so happen to develop on the planet with the perfect size and the perfect resources at the perfect distance away from the perfect sun. Life isn't spawning on all planets and then dying off because oh noes, this planet isn't perfect Earth is. Life didn't accidentally spawn on Earth and got lucky that all of Earth's resources were perfect for life.

Life spawned on Earth BECAUSE it had the conditions perfect for life. Life didn't just so happen to form on Earth, and the sun didn't just so happen to form perfectly after a big explosion. Over the course of BILLIONS of years the universe formed. Last time I checked, scientists don't have a billion years in a laboratory, so it's foolish to think that being unable to create life in a lab with matter means life didn't form as a product of nature and by chance, and not by intelligent design. Bear in mind that while the universe is 14 billion years old, the sun is only 4 billion years old, so the sun also didn't just pop out ready to go.

Seriously its elementary. Life has design and order. It just looks as if someone planned it. I mean I can go as far as to say how was the matter for the big bang theory present. Is it not possible that when god said "let there be light" that he utilized a big bang to create the universe? The fact as people put their faith in science and just accept there theories. My theory is that there is a god but I'm not wearing a lab coat so my words have no merits even if we're both just guessing. It is in fact a guess.

Here I was thinking you'd actually know what you were talking about. Alas, I was wrong.

For some reason you think because you don't understand something, then God did it.

Why would you type this big ass wall of text if you didn't know what you were saying. This is my second edit and now I'm genuinely confused and you have amused me.

You added nothing of substance. Your argument to mine was that. "I don't know what I'm talking about." That adds little to nothing. I respect those who disagree who actually tell me something. Similarly because you think you understand something you believe there Is no God. Look at life. As I said before anything man made we can agree it is designed without knowing its actual creator, but look at the life cycle of human. How women and men (animals)have ways to repopulate, how plants adapt to survive. Various earth cycles, seasons, different purposes of animals and other things. Earth was a self governing "system". And all of those things I actually understand. Its because I understand these things that I think there is a god. I can see the design and structure of life and earth through the concepts I understand. I think its illogical to think that structure is chance. It all fits together like a puzzle. Imo someone had to design this universe. Again that's my theory, similar to how scientist theorize that we all originate from a huge explosion that was not set off by a higher being. We both made a theory so why is it one is considered logical and the other illogical? Why did you read that wall of text without understanding my point or adding anything of substance. At least others could read my post and actually start a discussion. By saying "You don't know what you're talking about" isn't saying anything. Anybody can do that in response to any post all day.

Plus there was more than me talking about logical reasons why to believe in god. Half the post was addressed as to how Christians behave and why we aren't actually judgmental. Yet you only focus on one part because you were so eager to tear down my argument without actually reading apparently.

 

[Bacillus]

i'm a firm believer that religion doesn't teach morality since humanity and society do that on their own, however, i also do believe it's interesting to know about in order to learn certain cultures' traditions, etc.

it's polarized into two different ideological conditions, and it obviously has some merits to certain individuals/groups and has proven to increase brutality but also been proven to provide tranquility in certain circumstances. so, it's good and bad depending on multiple factors

it's the delusional extremists (i suppose that's redundant) that people despise, and it's the extremists that warp reality and suit it to their own liking. (and i also stand with the belief that any form of fanaticism can be brutal.) religion only plays a small part in that, really

 

[ComplexCity]

Thanks for reading and saying my post was good. Makes me happy. I can understand your point. I merely wanted to focus on christinaity because that's what I have the most experience with and one that I often see come up when its no religion vs religion. It usually winds up Christian vs Athiest even if it doesn't start or is intended to be that way. Sorry bout that. I do think it couldn't hurt to believe in something though. I won't go into if it helps morality because unfortunately I know a lot of people who say they are Christians who are selfish and etc, and I've known a lot of good athiests.


Like I said, I think I gave myself a better chance then someone who follows nothing. Pascals is not the strongest argument but it has its merits. I was just tackling the "illogical stereotype". I can accept that people disagree with that argument.

Its what I'm here for. xD I'm actually surprised people read it. When I write that much ppl usually pay no mind.


Thanks for reading and saying my post was good. Makes me happy. I can understand your point. I merely wanted to focus on christinaity because that's what I have the most experience with and one that I often see come up when its no religion vs religion. It usually winds up Christian vs Athiest even if it doesn't start or is intended to be that way. Sorry bout that. I do think it couldn't hurt to believe in something though. I won't go into if it helps morality because unfortunately I know a lot of people who say they are Christians who are selfish and etc, and I've known a lot of good athiests.


Like I said, I think I gave myself a better chance then someone who follows nothing. Pascals is not the strongest argument but it has its merits. I was just tackling the "illogical stereotype". I can accept that people disagree with that argument.

Its what I'm here for. xD I'm actually surprised people read it. When I write that much ppl usually pay no mind.

Seriously its elementary. Life has design and order. It just looks as if someone planned it. I mean I can go as far as to say how was the matter for the big bang theory present. Is it not possible that when god said "let there be light" that he utilized a big bang to create the universe? The fact as people put their faith in science and just accept there theories. My theory is that there is a god but I'm not wearing a lab coat so my words have no merits even if we're both just guessing. It is in fact a guess.



You added nothing of substance. Your argument to mine was that. "I don't know what I'm talking about." That adds little to nothing. I respect those who disagree who actually tell me something. Similarly because you think you understand something you believe there Is no God. Look at life. As I said before anything man made we can agree it is designed without knowing its actual creator, but look at the life cycle of human. How women and men have ways to repopulate, how plants adapt to survive. Various earth cycles, seasons, different purposes of animals and other things. Earth was a self governing "system". It all fits together like a puzzle. Imo someone had to design this universe. Again that's my theory, similar to how scientist theorize that we all originate from a huge explosion that was not set off by a higher being. We both made a theory so why is it one is considered logical and the other illogical? Why did you read that wall of text without understanding my point or adding anything of substance. At least others could read my post and actually start a discussion. By saying "You don't know what you're talking about" isn't saying anything. Anybody can do that in response to any post all day.

Plus there was more than me talking about logical reasons why to believe in god. Half the post was addressed as to how Christians behave and why we aren't actually judgmental. Yet you only focus on one part because you were so eager to tear down my argument without actually reading apparently.

Well my friend is an atheist and the reason why he can't beleieve in Christianity is because there is no tangible proof of God

 

[Omega]

Well my friend is an atheist and the reason why he can't beleieve in Christianity is because there is no tangible proof of God

I've dealt with this too. "Tangible proof" Is hard to come by. Especially since Christianity is a religion of faith. If he is looking for god to open up the skies and say hello they probably won't happen. However, there are instances in which it seems very possible a god might exist but because people are hardwired against it (no matter how neutral they think they are) they dismiss certain things and except other things with just as little or less proof. Somewhere in the bible (don't know exact chapter) it says to simply look around you if you believe there is no god (paraphrasing). It holds true. If you see a design or system....there must be a designer or someone who put it in place. Similarly we have no physical proof that a god didn't create this universe. People would argue

1. Evolution: We evolved from monkeys

My response: I don't think we have complete evidence this is true and its still a theory (I need to research this more but I never have time) and if we did how do we not know our shared ancestor(if it exists) was Adam. 0_0 I can't prove it but neither can you. Maybe humans looked like monkeys back then 0_0.

2. Big Bang
My response: I really don't buy this but for arguments sake couldn't god have created the big bang? Again you can't prove that isn't true and it would make sense.

3. The intricate systems make more sense if my theory of an existing god is true imo. If people are actually honest with themselves they would agree that some higher being had to have created all of this.

Well my friend is an atheist and the reason why he can't beleieve in Christianity is because there is no tangible proof of God

I've dealt with this too. "Tangible proof" Is hard to come by. Especially since Christianity is a religion of faith. If he is looking for god to open up the skies and say hello they probably won't happen. However, there are instances in which it seems very possible a god might exist but because people are hardwired against it (no matter how neutral they think they are) they dismiss certain things and accept other things with just as little or less proof. Somewhere in the bible (don't know exact chapter) it says to simply look around you if you believe there is no god (paraphrasing). It holds true. If you see a design or system....there must be a designer or someone who put it in place. Similarly we have no physical proof that a god didn't create this universe. People would argue

1. Evolution: We evolved from monkeys

My response: I don't think we have complete evidence this is true and its still a theory (I need to research this more but I never have time) and if we did how do we not know our shared ancestor(if it exists) was Adam. 0_0 I can't prove it but neither can you. Maybe humans looked like monkeys back then 0_0.

2. Big Bang
My response: I really don't buy this but for arguments sake couldn't god have created the big bang? Again you can't prove that isn't true and it would make sense.

3. The intricate systems make more sense if my theory of an existing god is true imo. If people are actually honest with themselves they would agree that some higher being had to have created all of this.

Despite what people think many athiests don't follow religion or Christianity for reasons such as

"God didn't do A or let B happen"

"I can't see him, or have tangible evidence."

People who nearly die say they have experiences but people dismiss this "proof" as an act, or hallucination simply because they wouldn't accept proof it slapped them in the face. So its tough when they are looking for that. Hopefully god can reach him some way.

 

[Punk Hazard]

1. Evolution: We evolved from monkeys

That's not what evolution says at all. Only accurate part of this is the part about shared ancestors.

 

[Multiply]

You added nothing of substance. Your argument to mine was that. "I don't know what I'm talking about." That adds little to nothing. I respect those who disagree who actually tell me something.

Tell you what? How you are wrong? Won't work because you won't listen.

Similarly because you think you understand something you believe there Is no God.

Wrong. There is no tangible proof of a God or Gods. I've never stated that there is without a doubt no God(s).

Look at life. As I said before anything man made we can agree it is designed without knowing its actual creator, but look at the life cycle of human. How women and men (animals)have ways to repopulate, how plants adapt to survive. Various earth cycles, seasons, different purposes of animals and other things. Earth was a self governing "system". And all of those things I actually understand. Its because I understand these things that I think there is a god.

So because you can't conceive that these things were not created by a designer(If we're not assuming that the Universe itself is the designer), you instantly attribute it to an all-being and all-knowing God? You don't want to understand these things further? We found them and now you just don't care about what else is out there?

I can see the design and structure of life and earth through the concepts I understand. I think its illogical to think that structure is chance.

Why is it illogical? It's illogical to you because you can't conceive it. It's okay to say you don't know or understand something. You think that throughout the entire universe that it's illogical that intelligent life would rise? You aren't using your brain.

It all fits together like a puzzle. Imo someone had to design this universe. Again that's my theory, similar to how scientist theorize that we all originate from a huge explosion that was not set off by a higher being.

Who said 'it' was not 'set off' by a higher being? Scientists flat out say they don't know what caused the big bang.

We both made a theory so why is it one is considered logical and the other illogical?

Because your initial and ultimate point was, 'scientists don't know everything, thus God'.

Why did you read that wall of text without understanding my point or adding anything of substance. At least others could read my post and actually start a discussion. By saying "You don't know what you're talking about" isn't saying anything. Anybody can do that in response to any post all day.

Didn't I start a discussion though? You replied. You don't know what you're talking about. I don't know what else you wanted me to say.

Plus there was more than me talking about logical reasons why to believe in god. Half the post was addressed as to how Christians behave and why we aren't actually judgmental.

I don't care about that.

Yet you only focus on one part because you were so eager to tear down my argument without actually reading apparently.

I actually read it several times. I replied because what you said was simply stupid, for lack of a better word.

 

[ComplexCity]

I've dealt with this too. "Tangible proof" Is hard to come by.

I can understand where Atheist and Agnostic people come from. My thing is that we don't know everything and the human race will never know all things (as it says in the bible). There are a multitude of things that the human race does not know but I guess the sole mission is to acquire all knowledge and surpass any limits. However, tangible proof is a human construct created in our mentality and any claim without it is automatically dismissed

Especially since Christianity is a religion of faith

Atheist don't want to hear this and (some) agnostic people will frown at this then turn away. However, I also see this viewpoint as well. One of the main reasons why I believe in the bible is because of revelations forseeing events that are happening in the world today. However my thing is this, faith didn't come out of anywhere, it is human design to have faith in something, even if it is not religious. It didn't come out of thin air

If he is looking for god to open up the skies and say hello they probably won't happen

This made me chuckle

However, there are instances in which it seems very possible a god might exist but because people are hardwired against it (no matter how neutral they think they are) they dismiss certain things and except other things with just as little or less proof.

From NB to Youtube to FB to Reddit, I see this all too much. Another thing I dislike is when atheist try to use certain parts of the bible to try and prove their point without understanding the text and then try prove the bible to be faulty and contradictory. The bible is not the only book (which has been heavily altered anyway) that deals with Christianity. That is what is just taught in most churches

Somewhere in the bible (don't know exact chapter) it says to simply look around you if you believe there is no god (paraphrasing). It holds true. If you see a design or system....there must be a designer or someone who put it in place. Similarly we have no physical proof that a god didn't create this universe

According to the rules of debating, you cannot disprove a negative (something Christians don't see as a negative). So what I like to do, is ask for proof about things that come from the bible such as morality and faith. I don't really get concrete answers on here nor through the research I find, which gives me another reason to believe in the bible. It's crazy too, I was looking up chemical evolution (another theory about how we came to be) and was just laughing because of how absurd it sounded. Let's say it was true

"The first living things on Earth were prokaryotes with a type of cell similar to present-day bacteria. Prokaryote fossils have been found in 3.4-million-year-old rock in the southern part of Africa"

Where did the prokaryotes come from? How did whatever created come to exist?

People would argue

1. Evolution: We evolved from monkeys

My response: I don't think we have complete evidence this is true and its still a theory (I need to research this more but I never have time) and if we did how do we not know our shared ancestor(if it exists) was Adam. 0_0 I can't prove it but neither can you. Maybe humans looked like monkeys back then 0_0

I agree with certain parts and theories of evolution. The above is not one

2. Big Bang
My response: I really don't buy this but for arguments sake couldn't god have created the big bang? Again you can't prove that isn't true and it would make sense.

I actually believe in the big bang and biblical text support it as well

3. The intricate systems make more sense if my theory of an existing god is true imo. If people are actually honest with themselves they would agree that some higher being had to have created all of this

It's not a theory but a fact however, it is only true for those who believe

Despite what people think many athiests don't follow religion or Christianity for reasons such as

"God didn't do A or let B happen"

Which is not how God works

"I can't see him, or have tangible evidence."

And we didn't see evolution happen, however scientist study fossils and extract and review data to make logical conclusions on the process of evolution. I'm gonna sit here and say I'm a professor but I know the basics of it. Sodom from Genesis seems to have been found but I'll have to deeply looking into that. I feel like the proof is out there, as little as their might be

People who nearly die say they have experiences but people dismiss this "proof" as an act, or hallucination simply because they wouldn't accept proof it slapped them in the face. So its tough when they are looking for that. Hopefully god can reach him some way.

I only debate on here to kill time. I mean there's only so much you can say. Kinda tiring having to repeat the same thing over and over again. Like it says in the bible. There will be those who listen and those continue to do what they want. Not word for word, but you catch my drift XD