ummm god never fought a war period...
Printable View
ummm god never fought a war period...
I'm not arguing with you, it's stupid... you think god picks favorites
If god picks favorites why would he let his own son be tortured by romans and be nailed down to a cross where he sat for a week in agonizing pain before he finally died?
You obviously have some sort of vendetta or problem with whatever conception of god you have in your mind because something in life didn't work out for you, in which case you are not open for discussion, because you aren't trying to discuss, you are trying to prove me wrong. If you are trying to prove me wrong, than you have already closed your eyes and ears to what I am saying, so I'll let you talk to these people instead.
P.E.A.C.E
but to answer your question, I don't follow written scriptures, I have my own idea of what God is. God's purpose is to create, he fufilled that purpose, now he is observing.
legato, he doesn't create then he sits. He watches over us. but you really need to focus and notice his help when he offers it.
Don't ignore your common sense and your conscious cuz they'll lead you to him.
This is the truthQuote:
Originally Posted by Legato
i guess we agree on this situation than legato
all praise do to allah? that student was roman catholic!Quote:
Originally Posted by sweet sista
but even more importantly, the argument is critically flawed
if thats teh case,, why didnt god prevent the pregnancy?Quote:
Originally Posted by TeknicelStylez
honey, that ain't your common sense. maybe it's the influence of someone else or maybe other thing i dunno what but sure it ain't ya true common senses. as for the things we do and we success get them done. i think he makes sure that things work properly when we truthfuly work on something.Quote:
Originally Posted by Legato
hehehQuote:
Originally Posted by My First Timbs
first, i think truth can be acknowledged by anyone with common sense.
second and as for the argument, i don't know i wasn't there.
I was merely trying to explain how the baby's death wasn't the worst case scenario, you know good arising out of bad situations.Quote:
Originally Posted by My First Timbs
I don't believe in divine intervention, I think the concepts rediculous.
well see, here in lies the subtle but crucial heart of the debate!Quote:
Originally Posted by TeknicelStylez
it seems as if (and legato has driven this home so many times but it keeps getting ignored) that there is an overt and outrageous copout and double standard when one believes in a god concept
premise 1 = god knows everything and is in control of everything and is looking out for our best interest (so we praise him for this and offer our worship)
premise 2= when bad things happen, somehow the religionists "cops out" and blames it on the god given gift of free will (as if god isnt ultimately in control of the divine plan)
the religionist for some strange reason will always RATIONALIZE every situation so that a perceived subjective "good" can come out of an apparant negative situation!
call it what it is.. its merely just a rationalization!
when good things happen.. its all good...... but when bad things happen, the religionist is FORCED to quickly and irrationally try to somehow find some "silver lining" in the cloud and then proclaim that this perceived silver lining not only outweighs the cloud, but even more importantly, it was the reason god made the cloud to begin with
silliness
See timbs here your putting values on things- you as a man believe is bad versus things that you percieve as good. It's the same putting values to a triangle versus a circle- and thus your arguments is flawed also!Quote:
Originally Posted by My First Timbs
Who's to say what's bad or what's good?
Are we taught right from wrong from our parents- or our we born with the knowledge of what's right- and we learn the bad things from our parents and the world we are brought into?
Free Will is the Gift. We decide what to do with our lives- do we kill or heal?
Premise 1- that's your view of God, orhow you percieive other peoples view of God.
Premise 2- that's your view on relgionists, and God's "divine plan"- on earth we our in control of bringing about god's divine plan and right now we our failing horribly
until you can except God into your life you will never be able to see how he works in your life.
thats the same as me saying
"until u believe in my mystical magic, u wont know that their are magical fairies flying around everywhere"
a rational stance cant rely on subjectivity. one shoul dnot have to "believe" in order to see what the issue is.. (once u "believe" its already too late because ur mind is predisposed to interpreting things based on the belief)
True-But when you know something others don't then your playing a totally different ball gameQuote:
Originally Posted by My First Timbs
like when u talk about things that people aren't good at. yeah maybe you're good at it but they're not. how can they be positive that what you're saying is true when it's not their major. people usually suppose that either you're right and u have so much knowledge or they might think u tryin' to dupe them.
i think we get into trouble when we try to figure out gods reasoning for the decisions he makes. we may realize it later, but right now we're not at level to understand the thought process behind why god allows certain things to go down. we're going by what we understand and thats all we know and with that understanding is how we will react to how things happen.
its like if a child asks his father for some ice cream and he says "no". the child will get angry and start crying because they dont understand the though process behind why their father wont let them have the ice cream. they're not mature enough to understand why at that particular time(because the child will ask his father at different time and he may say "yes") why they couldnt get ice cream and with the understanding that child has, they will react to that decision.
i don't think there is a person who doesn't believe at all. not necessarily in god but in certain concepts. even you timbs you do believe in what you believe.Quote:
Originally Posted by My First Timbs
there has to be some kinda situation that took place in someone's life during his/her childhood that created a certain idea in mind.
later, when we grow up we sure start to build or examine our ideas "beliefs" about things in life.
Now it's hard to effect someone's mind cuz he/she is not in a weak position as when they were kids. in other words, reality can be seen without any interference from any old beliefs if it's reality. and if there was an interference it won't be that effective comparing to the truth. for those who wants the truth.
as far as i can define, you have to put "belief" into something you haven't experienced with your 5 senses.
now no one reply with some retarded "yo your senses are just electricity, drop the knowledge", the 5 senses are the only way a human being can experience something.
true, however you can't condemn all beliefs just cuz they were passed by mama and papa. you have to examine them-beliefs- and experience them and see if they got a true value.
beside knowledge itself is something that was passed during the centuries and so the philosophies. so to say i have to drop a belief just cuz it was passed by our ancestors TO ME. it's like me saying to you, drop knowledge just coz it was passed by those who came before you.
if you want to know the truth in a belief i think the best thing to do is to check it the same way as you would examine theories. Once alone and once you build on others if theirs were right. Anyway, to check that a theory is correct, you have to be a theorist or a really an expert student. you can't be an actor or a broadcaster and still want to prove a theory is wrong. you have to know the exact diminutions to what you're condemning not cuz it's a religious thing but just to be true and fully aware.
And the reason i'm mentioning this, is when someone is going to condemn a belief. I think he/she really should start checking the main source to that belief, How is the source explained exactly? Who did start that belief?
you should check more than one resource and after you complete your "KNOWLEDGE" about it. i think then, one can hit the right spot where it hurts most and prove that a certain belief is fake.
but using people's ignorance in certain things OR analyzing some beliefs without full KNOWLEDGE about them isn't a professional behavior.
This Thread Will Fry My Brain And Thats Saying Something For Someone Who Is Living In Iraq
sorry if i only read the first post but i just have some comical criticism here. i dont think there is any force or rule that causes a triangle to always have all angles equal 180 degrees, because if it didnt equal 180 degrees, then we wuldnt call it a triangle. theres no force stopping it. whe just make a boundary up that says if it exceeds this, then it is no longer what we previously defined it as. i dont kno, just droppin the first thing that came to my head
get at me-
u are exactly correct..
a triangle is a humanoid concept.. we created the concept of a triangle.. so its our logic that causes them to adgere to the alleged natural laws
Just Like How The Human Body Is Symmetric, Mo'fuggaz!
Well...most Human Bodies....bless The Disfigured =(
lol
Is geometry or any form of math and science man made, or did man have to discover, uncover, and knowledge the facts/properties that were always there?
Just because it took man an unspecified amount of time to figure something out, or understand soemthing, does not mean when that thing is understood it then becomes man made.
If I go out and get some silk and rayon, then proceed to sew some panties, did I actually create something?
No. I made some panties from materials that were created however long ago. And at some point someone decided to name panties, panties.
Labeling, naming, or classifying things is what man does after they understand what that thing is.
One can only discover what is already there. But it got here somehow.
Does math or science prove there is a God or gods?
Ask yourself this question: How did or does Zero become One?
Its a humanoid "concept"Quote:
Originally Posted by My First Timbs
We created the concept of a triangle?
If so, where do the "natural laws" come from?
the natural laws we speak of are properties of our reality as we perceive it.
from that, we develop methods and systems to explain and fit the model so that it makes sense to us.
its our way of explaining the world we live in by creating generalizations and rules.
So are you saying a triangle is only a triangle because that is how we perceive it?Quote:
Originally Posted by My First Timbs
Does a triangle have 180 degrees or not?
I understand that the 180 is how we have come to lable it through time but it is still a triangle. Right?
If man had "labled" it as something else, it would still be a triangle at the end of the day.
If a natural law is based on "our" perception, does that not make natural laws man made? Thus nothing is "natural"
Can we perceive something that is not there?
Or do we lable and explain it mathematically/scientifically after we have researched, studied, and understood it.
The scientific method is a sort of a check and balance system to create a solid foundation for the eventual understanding of something natural.
It helps us explain the world we live in, but it does not create the world.
The lable or classification or whatever is simply language to explain a natural occurence. Give it a different classification or use different language it is still a triangle.
Man might have drawn a triangle in the dirt 50 trillion years ago, but does that mean he created it? (the true essence of creation)
With all do respect My 1st Timbs, and pardon me if I am missing your point,
but your implication of perception = reality is as unscientific as a mystery God.
Which by the way I do not believe in either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by june181972
if we called a triangle a square, it would be called a sqaure.
nothing is anything but its substance without humans naming it.
ExactlyQuote:
Originally Posted by whitey
We do not "create" the substance we just give it a name
We us a word, a form of language, to communicate to one another
We are not speaking anything into existence
A baby cries and srceams and hollers before he/she has the knowledge of language to say "I am hungry"
The phrase "I am hungry" does not create the sensation of an empty stomach
You can say that people that "believe" in God, have experienced him with their senses.
regarding triangles
peep the equilateral triangle formed by placing the hands flat, thumbs extended, touching the tips of the thumbs and the sides of the fore fingers
thats real geometry right there
1
I don't know if I siad in this thread already but.....
Circles. The earth is a sphere, the moon, the sun. Any liquid in space becaomes a sphere, any gas, or solid for that matter.
The circle is infinite, you run around in a circle, your back where you started. Same thing as a sphere. There's infinite wisdom in the circle, you just have to reconize it in nature, and in self.
Actually thats not true. True shape is an oblate spheriod. Earth is slightly flattened at the poles and slightly bulging at the Equator :learning:Quote:
Originally Posted by Charging Soldier
true indeed
but i just wanted to comment about the nature of the circle/sphere.
once again, the concept of a circle or sphere is a humanoid concept.. (of course the actual shape does indeed exist irrespective of us existing) however, the properties and traits given to it are purely subjective and generalized for our own understanding.
the planets and other celestial bodies being pseudo spherical has no bearing on an inherant alleged wisdom or design.
your understanding exist because of your own existence based upon this logic, which means everything you hold as truth is bullshit because everything you comprehend is done so with a humanoid concept.
although the post above was unecessarily brash and unecessarily insultingQuote:
Originally Posted by Eric Unseen
unknowingly eric unseen has touched upon the crux of the issue and is actually correct in a sense!!
the human brain and mind is designed to look at the world we see, assign properties to phenomenon and recognize patterns and then form a conclusion based on this input!
thats all our brains do!
so in a sense, everything that man can conceive, conceptualize or assign properties to is fallible to an extent and is perception based for our own benefit of making sense of the world.
with our reason, certain things are found or thought to possess more of a "truth" value than others (based on testing and the natural uniformity of experience).
Understanding the fallibility of "raw human reasoning" is the very reason why it is extremely necessary to make all attempts possible to have thought processes and conclusions based on that which can be verifiable, reproducible and potentially falsifiable!
So atleast at the end of the day, whatever is thought, conceived and proposed has a great chance of being as close to objective reality as humanly possible.
how do you know it was unknowing? Assumption with no proof and contradictory to your own scientific methodology. I'm perfectly aware of the concepts I'm introducing to the discussion even if I don't reach your same narrow-minded conculsions.
"Understanding the fallibility of "raw human reasoning" is the very reason why it is extremely necessary to make all attempts possible to have thought processes and conclusions based on that which can be verifiable, reproducible and potentially falsifiable!"
I exist beyond the physical limitations you cling to.
Wether our brain is right or wrong, or whatever level of fallibility, we are still analyzing natural phenomena.
Where does the "nature" come from?
If we don't understand it, it is still there.
And "it" had an origin.
Why do people equate their disbelief in God (in whatever form) with being
Rational, Logical, and Objective?
This always rubs me as unfounded intellectual arrogance.
I don't think anyone here is saying God is some sort of genie.
Why can't God be mathematical and scientific. (no mystery God)
Just because one can't understand the knowledge of God, doesn't mean one is therefore unable to understand a triangle.