like what!?....jebus walking on water!?....
People get raised from the dead all the time
Religulous
- Thread starter OSCORP
- Start date
Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:
People get raised from the dead all the time
jinxx
Super Freak
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/v/5URYhXE55bo&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/v/5URYhXE55bo&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
Religion is false whether faith is an outdated concept or not. Which it obviously is.
There's lots of physical evidence to support claims made by Spider-Man comics. There is not one iota of evidence to support the claim of divinity.
This depends on which strain of Buddhism you're talking about, because some embrace the concept of divinity wholeheartedly while others reject it completely. And of course many scholars dispute secular Buddhism is a religion at all.
It doesn't necessarily preclude it but it's fundamentally irrational, which creates a viral pretext for dismissing reason. We don't need to be rocket scientists to see why scientists and academics are atypically atheist while on the other end of the spectrum the closer to fundamentalism one is the less likely one is to tolerate reason. Dismissing the theory of evolution by natural selection for example is irrational based on the evidence and yet ID is purely a faith-based play.
Your second sentence contradicts the third. Religion is unnecessary.
The religious texts themselves condone and even mandate this behavior.
Belief in god(s) is identical to belief in leprechauns. These people look foolish because religion is foolish. It's telling that the only person who acquitted himself did so by throwing his hands in the air and admitting it could all be bunk.
No, it's not. And moreover it's a cancer on our ability to think for ourselves. The fact of the matter is anyone can use any religious text to say anything, which is why bigots find bigotry and why lovers find love in there. When you look at the retrograde forces in society - any society bar the Buddhist ones oddly enough - they almost always have a religious basis. Prop 8 for example can only be seen as a moronic offense by any rational person. I'll give you one guess where the rationale came from.
Can you give us a specific example based on fact and not myth? (For example: "Killing is bad because you'll go to hell and be without Jesus" doesn't count, because it's an improvable mythological assertion.) This sort of argument always collapses, because how do you explain the millions of atheists who believe killing is wrong? How do you explain the billions of people of competing faiths who believe killing is wrong? Now we're getting into religion as a social force completely independent of the truth or otherwise of its mythology. But since "good" atheists prove religion is unnecessary for believing killing is wrong, we have to question the utility of a cultural meme that may or may not propagate wisdom but unquestionably propagates irrationality.
Well no, and it's actually a fairly offensive comment on multiple levels.
For someone who doesn't believe in god it shouldn't matter to you what anyone else believes. There's no reason to argue so harshly
jinxx
Super Freak
ummmmm.... anarchy, anyone!?...
jinxx
Super Freak
tylerdurden
Super Freak
i'm afraid you're misled here. the 2 main schools of buddhism are theravada and mahayana. and both share the fundamental system of self-improvement. there is no reliance on "divinity" in any of the 2 schools. the mahayana school adheres to the concept of a "pure land" which is somewhat akin to heaven, but the way to get there is once again down to the individual, not on an external savior. and yes it is a "proper" religion, tho that goes back to my point abt labels being fundamentally unimportant. function over form.
well, i do not deny that christianity and islam generally holds that matters like evolution is contrary to their system of faith. but again, using that example is like tarring the entire concept of religion in general with the same brush. like i said, not ALL organized religions share the same concepts. oddly enough, maher left out eastern religions like buddhism and hinduism out of his argument. funny that.
sorry, no it does not. "unnecessary" is just based on your OWN world view, and that's fine. but don't assume it is not a vital part of life for many, many people. it helps them become better people. it inspires them to strive harder in life. in fact, in islam, the true meaning of the word "jihad" was NEVER holy war per se. it meant "to strive and struggle to improve oneself and the conditions of those in need". trust me on this, i live in a country where the official religion is islam and i have many good muslim friends. unfortunately, extremists have distorted that term and its use to the point where it is only associated with violence. [/QUOTE]
i believe there certainly is a case to be made in favour of what you're saying. but there is also the flip side. why? because the religious books were written very long ago in an archaic language, in an archaic manner. so sadly, there is much room for MISinterpretation, by the ignorant and those with an ulterior motive.
again, that conclusion you've made is based on your own way of looking at things. the world is what we make of it, as the saying goes. don't get me wrong, i'm not attacking u on a personal (or any) level. but this is a discussion after all. believing in a god is not a foolish thing, in itself. it's what u MAKE of your belief that makes all the difference. if u make something positve of yourself out of your belief in a god, then it's not foolish---the religion works. simple as that.
again, you're tarring ALL religions with the same brush. i won't speak for christianity or islam. but from a buddhist point of view, the insight this religion offers is all down to the basic physical principle of "cause and effect". (which is something shared by most religions anyway) and it's not even as simplistic as "kill and bad stuff will happen to u in return". it's the insight that all the bad stuff we experience is the result of a constant vicious circle. and the only way to break free of this circle is to eliminate the ROOT CAUSE of the bad stuff, not just the bad act itself. and that begins with the mind. i won't delve any further, unless u want me to. don't wanna sound like a missionary here.
well it wasn't meant as an offensive comment.
Last edited:
Actually, evolution doesn't contradict Christianity--that is unless you have a literal view of the Bible and believe that the universe is 6,000 years old. But there's a lot of scientists now that are Christian and believe in evolution. That evolution is the way god created things. In fact one of those guys is the head of the Human Genome Project.
tylerdurden
Super Freak
yeah, i understand as much.
i have a friend in the uk who is one brainy dude. he holds multiple degrees in physics, as well as theology. anyway, his "theory" is that god himself kick-started the process of evolution, which eventually arrived at the "final" version he foresaw in his own image---mankind. i thought that was a brilliant explanation and perfectly reconciles the 2 so-called opposing views.
jinxx
Super Freak
JESUS H. CHRIST!...ARE U GUYS STILL DEBATING ABOUT RELIGION!?....tsk,tsk!
...FYI, Galactus created the Universe then those crazy Celestials from another dimension seeded earth with their experiments!...so there!.....good night!!!
....tsk,tsk!...FYI, Galactus created the Universe then those crazy Celestials from another dimension seeded earth with their experiments!...so there!.....good night!!!
It wouldn't matter if people kept their mythology to themselves. But they don't. They take it into schools and governments and voting booths. I think we have a serious problem when irrationality is considered an acceptable basis for decision-making. There are currently millions of second class citizens in California this week because of what other people believe.
I'm not arguing harshly. I shudder to think what might happen if a real debate occurred!
There are far more than two strains of Buddhism and yes, some do indeed include the concept of divinity among their plumage. Your definition of religion opens up any philosophy to the term, which renders it a bit useless. These things are confusing enough without muddying terms.
One of the more obvious signs religions are not measures of objective truth.
No, I'm sorry, but you're wrong. You did contradict yourself. Read what you wrote again. Once we're "nothing to do with belief" then faith is unnecessary. But based on what you wrote below I think you might be misinterpreting my meaning.
I never said it wasn't. This is a completely separate issue as to whether the supernatural claims of religion are true or whether religion as a cultural force is a good thing. I don't dispute religion helps some people become better people, just as you presumably would not dispute some people do not "need" religion to become better people. But this isn't the point of Religulous and it's not the objection of people like me, which specifically is that the supernatural claims of religion are silly and encourage people to embed irrationality into their intellectual core. This is not helped by the mainstream religious failing to stand up and eradicate the extremist planks in their faiths, whether that be average Muslims not speaking out against terrorism or average Christians not speaking out against Prop 8.
I don't disagree, but it gets back to the central issue of whether the supernatural claims of these books are true. If these things are not "real" then they become merely instructive parables. Well so are Uncanny X-Men comics, but nobody seriously considers using those as cultural guides. We have to question whether books written by Bronze Age sheep herders are actually relevant on the whole, especially since they are so open to misinterpretation and we have proof enough they are fundamentally unnecessary.
Well no, it's a conclusion drawn by the fact that god(s) and leprechauns have precisely the same amount of evidence in their favor: None at all.
Is believing in leprechauns a foolish thing, in itself?
Yes, because the things we are talking about apply to all of them. Good atheists show religion is unnecessary in moral terms. It doesn't matter what religion we're talking about. Indeed the very notion of competing religions show religion is unnecessary in moral terms, unless we're to accept that the adherents of all but the "one true faith" are immoral. The conversation becomes much easier once we untangle the threads:
• Are the supernatural claims of any given religion real?
• Are the moral claims of any given religion necessary?
• Does the social benefit of faith outweigh the social cost?
These are three distinct issues. We can open a thread in the sandbox to talk about them if you want, but this is the last I'll post in this thread so it can return to Religious. Which, by the way, would answer those questions with a trio of nos.
That's not arguing harshly?
Again, if God doesn't exist then it doesn't matter what anyone believes, you really shouldn't care at all what people do because it doesn't matter, there's no reason in that case for anyone to act good
Again, if God doesn't exist then it doesn't matter what anyone believes, you really shouldn't care at all what people do because it doesn't matter, there's no reason in that case for anyone to act good
If you are only acting good because you believe in a God who will punish you if you don't, then you aren't doing it for the right reason, IMO. People should still act good to one another in a universe with no God, because it ultimately will bring you and others the greatest amount of happiness, which is an intrinsic good. Even if life is finite, and if there is no supernatural reward after "death," that is no reason to want to be miserable and to exploit others all the time. That is a pretty silly thing to say, actually.
jinxx
Super Freak
hey, y'all!....off topic here!......I would like to know what's your take on the afterlife(if you believe/speculate/don't believe at all there's an afterlife!)....I'm looking at you barbielith!
jinxx
Super Freak
....leave him alone!...I actually find him/her/skynet cerebrally stimulating!....better than cocai..errr...television or the radio!
hey, y'all!....off topic here!......I would like to know what's your take on the afterlife(if you believe/speculate/don't believe at all there's an afterlife!)....I'm looking at you barbielith!
Like everything, it starts over.
"There is no way to know the answer to some question any faster than what's going on... I believe the universe is very literally a computer and that it is being used by someone,or something, to solve a problem. It sounds like a good-news /bad news joke: the good news is that our lives have purpose; the bad news is that their purpose is to help some remote hacker estimate pi to nine jillion decimal places."
We know the answer, it's 42, it's the question that is confounding us.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
InArt: The Lord of the Rings - Aragorn 1:6- Latest: ObiGlennKenobi
-
-
Hot Toys: - MMS156 - Captain America The First Avenger Official Specs and Pics- Latest: Berry The Music Man
-
