It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Religion, Scripture and logical thinking

page: 3
13
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 10:40 AM
link   
a reply to: stutteringp0et

So, that doesn't prove anything. You even admit that there isn't a clear interpretation on what that means. I personally see it that the amazing lack of detail in that passage speaks to it being more about other people on earth than outside our planet. If the bible mentions alien life, you have to really do some linguistic rope jumps to make it work. If the bible is true and the interpretation was really meant to mean aliens, the book should just be clear about it instead of so vague. But then again, that is one the things I hate about religious texts. Vagueness. It really sours the whole experience when you can make the book say whatever you want it to say.




posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 10:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Actually yes, there is a reason to reject religion, any religion outright. They are all creations of man are therefore flawed.


A statement which I can completely agree. There is no way any religion "got it right" because they were created by man. Maybe some of it is right, maybe some of it is political - certainly we can't expect to have even of a fraction of understanding what an actual god wants.

To be clear, I'm not offended by your opinions.

Why does it have to be one god? I have no idea, it just makes sense to me. Two all-powerful beings, the two toughest kids on the block are eventually going to fight.

Having a hero is one thing, but worship? I doubt you actually "worship" the musician. As you may have guessed by the quote I used in my first comment - I'm a Rush fan, but I do not worship them.

I curse too, but I try not to for practical reasons. When I'm trying to get my point across, every curse works against my goal.



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 10:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask
and yet the prevailing scientific model is the big bang.......


Yes, there are quite a bit of mathematical and sane models for that as well.


That something came from nothing.......


Which you are apparently unaware of since you are pushing this falsehood. The Big Bang NEVER at ANY point says that something came from nothing. Before the Big Bang happened, the universe was compressed into a a singularity, meaning that it was everything. All the Big Bang is is a changing of states of the universe.


Which kind of goes against science itself doesnt it?.........


Yes, strawmans do go against science. Care to talk about real science now and what the Big Bang Theory really says?


That being said, the world has taken this as doctrine........


It certainly isn't stopping you from failing to understand it correctly.


Perhaps all those people who think religious people are ignorant fools can see their own ignorance in thinking of god as some "Man" they themselves are going to find in the sky........

Science explains a lot, perhaps "god" works within these perimeters we call the natural world, Perhaps they are looking at God every day in everything they cant explain......


Sure it's possible. That is why I'm an agnostic. Though I don't think any religious texts have anything to do with this god you are speaking about.



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 10:48 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t




Which you are apparently unaware of since you are pushing this falsehood. The Big Bang NEVER at ANY point says that something came from nothing. Before the Big Bang happened, the universe was compressed into a a singularity, meaning that it was everything. All the Big Bang is is a changing of states of the universe.


and how did that come about? again look at you , stating it as fact when you dont know that it is fact...and trying to talk down to me.....




Yes, strawmans do go against science. Care to talk about real science now and what the Big Bang Theory really says?


its not a straw man, the fact is whether you want to call it a singularity or whatever, where did IT COME FROM.....and how did it get to be there?

But please continue to talk down to me , I think its interesting to listen to people who talk about those who believe in religion, but then fail to see their own hypocrisy in how nasty they get with people who challenge THEIR own system of beliefs......

Irony



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 10:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0tIf the bible is true and the interpretation was really meant to mean aliens, the book should just be clear about it instead of so vague.


Maybe there wasn't a word in Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek to depict extraterrestrial life. If we consider the book of Enoch, it becomes pretty clear. Many books were removed from the Bible by Constantine - perhaps a clearer message existed at one time. Again, as you pointed out previously, man corrupted it.



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 10:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: stutteringp0et

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Actually yes, there is a reason to reject religion, any religion outright. They are all creations of man are therefore flawed.


A statement which I can completely agree. There is no way any religion "got it right" because they were created by man. Maybe some of it is right, maybe some of it is political - certainly we can't expect to have even of a fraction of understanding what an actual god wants.


Exactly.


To be clear, I'm not offended by your opinions.

Why does it have to be one god? I have no idea, it just makes sense to me. Two all-powerful beings, the two toughest kids on the block are eventually going to fight.


Sound reasoning, but it isn't proof. For all you know dualistic gods or plural gods have transcended beyond petty squabbles like the ones outlined in the bible (ex: Book of Job) and can truly synergize with each other working off of each other's abilities to create the universe. Such belief systems aren't unheard of on this planet.


Having a hero is one thing, but worship? I doubt you actually "worship" the musician. As you may have guessed by the quote I used in my first comment - I'm a Rush fan, but I do not worship them.


Yeah, maybe worship is a little extreme. I concede the point here.


I curse too, but I try not to for practical reasons. When I'm trying to get my point across, every curse works against my goal.


Cursing is an artform. If you can do it right, it doesn't work against your argument.



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 11:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask
and how did that come about? again look at you , stating it as fact when you dont know that it is fact...and trying to talk down to me.....


I don't know that you used a strawman in your appeal to discredit the Big Bang Theory? I certainly DO know that you used a strawman, because the Big Bang Theory NEVER claims to say that something came from nothing. That is a strawman and shows that you are uneducated with what the BBT actually says and covers.


its not a straw man, the fact is whether you want to call it a singularity or whatever, where did IT COME FROM.....and how did it get to be there?


We don't know. The Big Bang Theory doesn't cover those questions. The Big Bang Theory is just start of the standard model of space/time physics. It isn't the start of the universe though.


But please continue to talk down to me , I think its interesting to listen to people who talk about those who believe in religion, but then fail to see their own hypocrisy in how nasty they get with people who challenge THEIR own system of beliefs......

Irony


Challenging MY beliefs with a strawman is a FAR cry from challenging a religious belief due to lack of evidence.

How the Big Bang Theory Works


Although the big bang theory is famous, it's also widely misunderstood. A common misperception about the theory is that it describes the origin of the universe. That's not quite right. The big bang is an attempt to explain how the universe developed from a very tiny, dense state into what it is today. It doesn't attempt to explain what initiated the creation of the universe, or what came before the big bang or even what lies outside the universe.


Why don't you go study this theory instead of posting falsehoods about it?



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 11:20 AM
link   
a reply to: stutteringp0et

2) is a bit different to what you interpreted;
Graven Image - a carved idol or representation of a god used as an object of worship.

Like a Crucifiction chain or necklace...
Or the Statues that were destroyed at Mecca...

However Celebrity Worship I would definitely add to the list.




posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 11:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: shauny
Try and do this today, 2 of every species, all 4 Million plus species of Animal, 2 off each and try get them onto a boat that would have to be huge, perhaps a mile long and don’t forget half of every species would have eat the other half, unless the boat was 10 mile long with cages for every species, long shot right? and remember the species that have perished as a species by the hand of man. Now there is a loophole for two species, this would be the swimming and flying animals. There is just no way this fete could be done in 2014, never mind the time stamp the bible would have us believe, this story for me is IMPOSSIBLE. Many have faith in the story and are scared to let logic into the story. I go back to the Woman I spoke to who did not believe Dinosaurs roamed Earth’s surface many millions of years ago. There is faith and there is stupid blind faith. Again I mean no disrespect but to believe things logic or Science (I will get to Science) would tell them is ‘Impossible’ because it is.


Here's what you need to do to evaluate this topic seriously.
- Research Hebrew (does the Bible says "species?" I don't think so.)
- Do some math. There have been a lot of people that have evaluated the ark story over the years. I encourage you to check them out with a critical eye.
- Get a handle on what "logic" means. Logical statements can be untrue.



Life has found a way to live on the outside of the ISS
This one I know people will have an answer for but I am going to take in a whole new direction.

“O Lord, our Lord, How majestic is Thy name in all the earth, Who hast displayed Thy splendor above the heavens! …When I consider Thy heavens, the work of Thy fingers, The moon and the stars, which Thou has ordained; …O Lord, our Lord, How majestic is Thy name in all the earth!”

Above is scripture I have no idea what bible it came from or the verse and all that. The problem I have with Religion and the Bible is ‘Life’ God is said to have 2 Humans on Earth, one man, one woman, the woman being made from one of Man’s ribs. Why? Why would God take a Rib from Man to create Woman? He is all powerful and all able right? Why didn’t he just put a woman there? When I read this I see an ‘Anti Woman’ type argument. So Man had to give something up in order for Woman to live? or be created? I don’t get that.

It was proven life can live in many places, just lately life was found to live on the outside of the International Space Station (ISS) Now this brings huge implications to the Bible argument. Life can exist half a mile below and in Ice. Life can exist near a Lave fisher 5 mile down on the seabed, life is extraordinary, it is more than amazing. We have the ‘Creationism Vs Evolution’ question and it can be hard to believe either. If Man (Why always man?) came from Apes then I ask ‘Why do we still have apes and not what they evolved from’ You follow? If we came from Apes where is the lineage from before Apes? What did Apes evolve from? Therein we have the ‘Missing Link’

The Philae lander has found organic molecules – which are essential for life – on the surface of the comet where it touched down. The spacecraft managed to beam back evidence of the carbon and hydrogen–containing chemicals shortly before it entered hibernation mode to conserve falling power supplies. Although scientists are still to reveal what kind of molecules have been found on comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko, the discovery could provide new clues about how the early chemical ingredients that led to life on Earth arrived on the planet.


Can you explain to me the link between this and "religion vs. logical thinking?"



Above is Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenk, the Philae lander spaceship detected life on a COMET! How versatile is life? Isn’t it amazing? Life can and does exist anywhere and in any condition. Life has survived many ‘E.L.E’s’ Extinction Level Events and every time, life has survived thus allowing me to write this and you to read it. I don’t have the answers and something I can be sure is neither do you. You have ‘FAITH’ You believe with all your heart these impossible feats in the Bible are true to the point of writing. Every word is believed.
The Irony is, Science will in the end tell us what is true and what is impossible, can you feel the irony? Talk it up peeps. I hope debate can happen


I'd recommend...
- Researching the Christian (and other religions) views on faith before attacking it.
- Researching the Christian (etc.) views on the Bible before attacking said views. (Hint: Christian faith is not monolithic.)
- Reevaluating your statement that "life can and does exist anywhere" (because it's not true.)
- Coming to the realization that science cannot tell us what is true and what is impossible because it is not self-validatiing. Science rests on certain fragile philosophical assumptions that it cannot prove. Put it another way, science rests on faith.


To sum it up, OP, your attacks on religious beliefs are straw-men. I think you're really interested in the topic, and that's fantastic! Personally, I welcome critical views of religious belief. But I'd suggest doing your homework before attacking religious faith. It's more robust than you assume.



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 11:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: windword

No, you are not an atheist. You are in the "I hate God" category. That means you believe in Him and don't like what you see.

You are the Riddick-style person.



Think someone could spend half their life in a slam with a horse bit in their mouth and not believe? Think he could start out in some liquor store trash bin with an umbilical cord wrapped around his neck and not believe? Got it all wrong, holy man. I absolutely believe in God ... And I absolutely hate the f****r.
- Riddick

You call yourself an atheist, but you really just reject Him which is quite different from not believing He exists.



it is confusing to think that some look at order and see a god because they feel cared for, and yet others look at chaos and see a god because it cares nothing for them.

maybe god is an inkblot.
edit on 27-1-2015 by TzarChasm because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 11:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
2) is a bit different to what you interpreted;
Graven Image - a carved idol or representation of a god used as an object of worship.


When you consider how much makeup and photoshopping goes into celebrity image - are they not carved?



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 11:36 AM
link   
I could of sworn a long time, ago, in a magical, far way land, religion could of been logical with it teachings, and whatever meaning in their teachings would correlate together, and form wisdom which would give insights into the nature of things in a poetic, but dis playful way to share the insight of sages or wizards who understood the movements of the heavens and have left questions for the future to figure out.

Now it just bunch of crap where there is no wisdom and insight, and it just wants to play sad little games on sad little minds just for recognition and using false forms of hope, where as sad little men thinking their in control.

Sadly, many have to suffer, where as the God's or God seem to have abandoned them by locking them out there Kingdoms, or if it was stupid hopeful, they'd think it was some test where as their stupidity and understanding is the reward.

edit on 27-1-2015 by Specimen because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 11:56 AM
link   
a reply to: stutteringp0et

Good point.



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 12:08 PM
link   
All of this is very fascinating debate with each presenting a point of view that gives the rest another thing to think about. One thing that each side must concede is that none of us will have proof until we're dead.



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 12:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Akragon
Well... only Christians call Atheism a religion... even though its obviously not...

I think they only do it as an attempt at insulting Atheists though



Actually is stuff like that : First Chruch of Atheism, that making Atheism a religion.

The First Church of Atheism is formed around the belief that the mysteries of life can be explained through science and reason. We aim to provide a place for atheists to become ordained, for free, as well as a hub for atheists to find ministers to perform their ceremonies. This is our doctrine:

“Nothing exists besides natural phenomena. Thought is merely a function of those natural phenomena. Death is complete, and irreversible. We have faith solely in humankind, nature, and the facts of science.”


Also, Atheism is a religion according to a 2005 Wisconsin Federal Court ruling on the matter of Kaufman v. McCaughtry, as well as the Torcaso v. Watkins case that was affirmed by the 1961 U.S. Supreme Court--the highest court in the land--where court rulings become national law.

As you can see its not only Christians my friend.


Peace



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 12:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Seed76

You don't even know what the rulings were about or said. Try learning what they were about before inserting your foot in mouth.

Torcaso v. Watkins



In the early 1960s, the Governor of Maryland appointed Roy Torcaso (November 13, 1910 – June 9, 2007) as a notary public. At the time, the Constitution of Maryland required "a declaration of belief in the existence of God" in order for a person to hold "any office of profit or trust in this State".

Torcaso, an atheist, refused to make such a statement, and his appointment was consequently revoked. Torcaso, believing his constitutional rights to freedom of religious expression had been infringed, filed suit in a Maryland Circuit Court, only to be rebuffed. The Circuit Court rejected his claim, and the Maryland Court of Appeals held that the requirement in the Maryland Constitution for a declaration of belief in God as a qualification for office was self-executing and did not require any implementing legislation to be enacted by the state legislature.

The Court of Appeals justified its decision thus:

The petitioner is not compelled to believe or disbelieve, under threat of punishment or other compulsion. True, unless he makes the declaration of belief, he cannot hold public office in Maryland, but he is not compelled to hold office.

Torcaso took the matter to the United States Supreme Court, where it was heard on April 24, 1961.

The Court unanimously found that Maryland's requirement for a person holding public office to state a belief in God violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.

The Court had previously established in Everson v. Board of Education (1947):

It has occasionally been argued that in Torcaso v. Watkins the Supreme Court "found" secular humanism to be a religion. This assertion is based on a reference, by Justice Black in footnote number of the Court's finding, to court cases where organized groups of self-identified humanists, or ethicists, meeting on a regular basis to share and celebrate their beliefs, have been granted religious-based tax exemptions.

Justice Black's use of the term "secular humanism" in his footnote has been seized upon by some religious groups, such as those supporting causes such as teaching creationism in schools, as a "finding" that any secular or science-based activity is, in fact, religion.


Kaufman's argument that the prison officials violated his constitutional rights when they refused to give him permission to start a study group for atheist inmates at the prison.


Kaufman v. McCaughtry declared was a First Amendment issue, atheists have the same rights and protections as any other religion.

I think the court summed it up pretty well:



"It is undisputed that other religious
groups are permitted to meet at Kaufman’s prison, and
the defendants have advanced no secular reason why
the security concerns they cited as a reason to deny
his request for an atheist group do not apply equally to
gatherings of Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, or Wiccan
inmates."



A church is defined as an association of people who share a particular belief system. So yes, a church of atheism can really exist.



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 12:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Seed76

originally posted by: Akragon
Well... only Christians call Atheism a religion... even though its obviously not...

I think they only do it as an attempt at insulting Atheists though



Actually is stuff like that : First Chruch of Atheism, that making Atheism a religion.

The First Church of Atheism is formed around the belief that the mysteries of life can be explained through science and reason. We aim to provide a place for atheists to become ordained, for free, as well as a hub for atheists to find ministers to perform their ceremonies. This is our doctrine:

“Nothing exists besides natural phenomena. Thought is merely a function of those natural phenomena. Death is complete, and irreversible. We have faith solely in humankind, nature, and the facts of science.”


Also, Atheism is a religion according to a 2005 Wisconsin Federal Court ruling on the matter of Kaufman v. McCaughtry, as well as the Torcaso v. Watkins case that was affirmed by the 1961 U.S. Supreme Court--the highest court in the land--where court rulings become national law.

As you can see its not only Christians my friend.


Peace


Oh you have got to be kidding me.... LMAO!!!

Gonna have to add that to my "to do list"

Get ordained by the First Church of Atheism...

Become the first Atheist Heretic Minister

I love It!!


edit on 27-1-2015 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 01:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: Seed76

You don't even know what the rulings were about or said. Try learning what they were about before inserting your foot in mouth.


And maybe you should learn not to be aggressive and rude to others that have different opinions. Anyway..Still doesnt change the fact that the Supreme Court has recognized atheism as equivalent to a 'religion' for purposes of the First Amendment.

Whether or not someone interprets the said ruling as Atheism is a religion, its up to the person it self.

Peace



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 01:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Akragon

originally posted by: Seed76

originally posted by: Akragon
Well... only Christians call Atheism a religion... even though its obviously not...

I think they only do it as an attempt at insulting Atheists though



Actually is stuff like that : First Chruch of Atheism, that making Atheism a religion.

The First Church of Atheism is formed around the belief that the mysteries of life can be explained through science and reason. We aim to provide a place for atheists to become ordained, for free, as well as a hub for atheists to find ministers to perform their ceremonies. This is our doctrine:

“Nothing exists besides natural phenomena. Thought is merely a function of those natural phenomena. Death is complete, and irreversible. We have faith solely in humankind, nature, and the facts of science.”


Also, Atheism is a religion according to a 2005 Wisconsin Federal Court ruling on the matter of Kaufman v. McCaughtry, as well as the Torcaso v. Watkins case that was affirmed by the 1961 U.S. Supreme Court--the highest court in the land--where court rulings become national law.

As you can see its not only Christians my friend.


Peace


Oh you have got to be kidding me.... LMAO!!!

Gonna have to add that to my "to do list"

Get ordained by the First Church of Atheism...

Become the first Atheist Heretic Minister

I love It!!



Yeah!!! Also you are going be able to do the following as ordained minister :

What type of services can I perform as a minister?

You will be able to perform the following services:
-Weddings
-Funerals
-Commitment ceremonies
-Many others


Peace



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 01:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Akragon

originally posted by: Seed76

originally posted by: Akragon
Well... only Christians call Atheism a religion... even though its obviously not...

I think they only do it as an attempt at insulting Atheists though



Actually is stuff like that : First Chruch of Atheism, that making Atheism a religion.

The First Church of Atheism is formed around the belief that the mysteries of life can be explained through science and reason. We aim to provide a place for atheists to become ordained, for free, as well as a hub for atheists to find ministers to perform their ceremonies. This is our doctrine:

“Nothing exists besides natural phenomena. Thought is merely a function of those natural phenomena. Death is complete, and irreversible. We have faith solely in humankind, nature, and the facts of science.”


Also, Atheism is a religion according to a 2005 Wisconsin Federal Court ruling on the matter of Kaufman v. McCaughtry, as well as the Torcaso v. Watkins case that was affirmed by the 1961 U.S. Supreme Court--the highest court in the land--where court rulings become national law.

As you can see its not only Christians my friend.


Peace


Oh you have got to be kidding me.... LMAO!!!

Gonna have to add that to my "to do list"

Get ordained by the First Church of Atheism...

Become the first Atheist Heretic Minister

I love It!!



but then by whose authority are you supposed to be acting?



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join