The Religion Debate Thread

[kroner]

Remember that God made humans in the image of himself. If God was perfect than so would we be but we aren't perfect so that doesn't make God perfect.

This is actually where it becomes most apparent that the whole idea was made up in an attempt to make sense of the world by people who could not accept uncertainty. A god like humans? What are the chances? Again, about the same as anything else. The human centric stance of most religions is good evidence that the beliefs were invented by people and not influenced by objective truth.

[Pirog]

Lenseth>

I know the bible version...but there is a big chance that the (in my view) mythological Jesus was based on some form of resistance leader.
Not necessarily a violent one, but it would explain why both the Romans and the Jewish leaders feared him.

And crucification was NOT that common. It was reserved for enemies on the Roman Empire...it was not a method that the Jewish leaders used.

Also, the whole point with crucification was that the person would hang there and suffer and then serve as a warning to others by rotting on the same cross...so it would be extremely illogical to first end his suffering by killing him and later pull him down for burial.

[Meh]

Remember that God made humans in the image of himself. If God was perfect than so would we be but we aren't perfect so that doesn't make God perfect.

This is actually where it becomes most apparent that the whole idea was made up in an attempt to make sense of the world by people who could not accept uncertainty. A god like humans? What are the chances? Again, about the same as anything else. The human centric stance of most religions is good evidence that the beliefs were invented by people and not influenced by objective truth.

There are sevral way to interpet "in god image" one being internal as in the soul.

I think the treatment of the ka in Stargate SG-1 is pretty neat. The ka is sort of like a soul but not really. A soul is supposed to be the you that goes on after you die. The ka is you that is NOT you that seperates from you after you die where the soul which they did not seperate from a body goes elsewhere.

[Báng]

Something had to create everything...you can come up with explanation aftr explanation but whatever scientific reasoning you come up with it doesn't explain that something had to start everything....why can't you believe it was God. The world has evolved over time...why should God not have changed his ways also? I for one believe in Jesus and what he did...I don't like how it is currently being told in church, in Ireland anyway, because its plain boring and there should be more to it than that.

Someone wrote the Bible...it has lasted over 2000 years and people have followed its teachings...whatever way you twist the story of it the main jist of it will always come through. God sent his son down to us, Jesus lived his life and did his thing, he died for us, and now it's all good. Still learning...but all good.

[kroner]

Something had to create everything...you can come up with explanation aftr explanation but whatever scientific reasoning you come up with it doesn't explain that something had to start everything....why can't you believe it was God.

yes, you're right. you can believe it was god. but this just represents a small fraction of the possible explanations. there is nothing go on in answering the question of how it all started. it makes no sense to me to just pick one option and then cling to it. how about being open to all possibilities?

[trage]

Lenseth>

I know the bible version...but there is a big chance that the (in my view) mythological Jesus was based on some form of resistance leader.
Not necessarily a violent one, but it would explain why both the Romans and the Jewish leaders feared him.

And crucification was NOT that common. It was reserved for enemies on the Roman Empire...it was not a method that the Jewish leaders used.

Also, the whole point with crucification was that the person would hang there and suffer and then serve as a warning to others by rotting on the same cross...so it would be extremely illogical to first end his suffering by killing him and later pull him down for burial.

Ok you say that it was reserved for enemies of the Roman Empire yet when Jesus was cruified he was not only crusified with others, but they were common criminals. They were simple murders. Now tell me how often is murder today just by gang fights, store robbing, revenge, money, and love. The other two were crucified because they killed people..... So how was it reserved for enemies of the Roman Empire?

[trage]

Something had to create everything...you can come up with explanation aftr explanation but whatever scientific reasoning you come up with it doesn't explain that something had to start everything....why can't you believe it was God.

yes, you're right. you can believe it was god. but this just represents a small fraction of the possible explanations. there is nothing go on in answering the question of how it all started. it makes no sense to me to just pick one option and then cling to it. how about being open to all possibilities?

Some people believe certain opionions because they believe that other opinions can be proved wrong. So they choose one opinion and stick to it. Some just are persistent with certain things. Much of the time that subject is religion.

[kroner]

exactly. this is what i find wrong with religion. the refusal to accept other possibilities as such causes close-mindedness and intolerance. many religions even encourage the followers to keep their view points narrow by discouraging people from exploring the other possibilities (straying from the faith as they would call it). people should always, always keep in mind that they could very easily be wrong (especially when there is no evidence that they're right). to see things clearly, one should always consider all the possibilities.

this does not only pertain to religion, but to everything.

[trage]

Yes the problem is Kroner is all people are like that. Regardless of who you are or no matter how open minded you are you will always be close-minded about something.

[kroner]

shouldn't you work towards becoming a better person?
i try to be open-minded when ever i can be, although obviously i'm not perfect.

you're saying that people shouldn't attempt to imporve because they can't ever reach perfection. that's the most bs arguement i've heard in umm... the last hour.

[Meh]

shouldn't you work towards becoming a better person?

Bah... *Goes off and plays more Cantr*

[rklenseth]

shouldn't you work towards becoming a better person?
i try to be open-minded when ever i can be, although obviously i'm not perfect.

you're saying that people shouldn't attempt to imporve because they can't ever reach perfection. that's the most bs arguement i've heard in umm... the last hour.

People can imrpove themselves but they will never reach perfection. Nothing is ever perfect.

[rklenseth]

exactly. this is what i find wrong with religion. the refusal to accept other possibilities as such causes close-mindedness and intolerance. many religions even encourage the followers to keep their view points narrow by discouraging people from exploring the other possibilities (straying from the faith as they would call it). people should always, always keep in mind that they could very easily be wrong (especially when there is no evidence that they're right). to see things clearly, one should always consider all the possibilities.

this does not only pertain to religion, but to everything.

But are you willing to be open to the possibility that there is a God or something or that religion could be right? I sometimes find people of science to be just as narrowminded and closeminded about religion.

[trage]

shouldn't you work towards becoming a better person?
i try to be open-minded when ever i can be, although obviously i'm not perfect.

you're saying that people shouldn't attempt to imporve because they can't ever reach perfection. that's the most bs arguement i've heard in umm... the last hour.

No I am not saying that people shouldn't try to become better. I am saying that no one is perfect and they will always be narrow minded. The human mind can only perceive so much. Yes people should strive to become better, and one thing I can suggest for you is to try and use capitalizationg correctly. (Not meant as an insult just trying to help you become a better person [that one wasn't an insult either])

Oh and as it was said before god forgives all sins. He gives us all the chance for eternal salvation, and all we have to do is believe that Jesus was god's son and he died on the cross for our sins. All of us sin and there is nothing we can do about it. So he gives us the chance to be forgiven of our sins.

[west]

My personal take:

I am a Christian. Not because I was raised one, though I was, and not because I was tricked into being one, because I wasn't.

I think organized religion has its benefits--some people need structure in their lives--but on the whole does a lot of harm.

I don't think science is at odds with religion; I believe (and Averroes, the Muslim philosopher, would agree with me) that Scripture not only condones but ORDERS us to find out more about the world via science. As RKL said, the How and the Why are different.

I think certain parts of the bible are meant to be taken figuratively and certain parts literally, and certain parts it's a mystery which way they should be taken (again, Averroes would agree). For example, every 50 years or so, with our most advanced technology, we radically revamp our idea of how the universe began. The latest theory is the multiverse reverbration theory; look in tis month's DISCOVER mag for more info on that. Most of it (ex: quantum theory) boggles the minds of even our most advanced theorists; do you think God would have felt the need to give a 100% accurate scientific account of the Beginning to a bunch of shepherds in the desert? Meh. Doubt it. The creation story, as cool as it is, isn't much supported by current scientific findings.

Does it have to be? No, I don't think so. It's a good metaphor, but it shouldn't be taken as fact or an attempt at fact.

One thing I object to is people twisting science to either try to prove or disprove religion or religious theories. Science is supposed to be objective and honest and fearless, and nobody is well-served when its twisted one way or the other.

There's more, but I'm going to dinner.

$.02