Why do Atheists care about religion?

page: 42
30
<< 39  40  41    43  44  45 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 6 2009 @ 10:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Gawdzilla
 


I didn't tell you not to doubt. By all means doubt. That's in your signature. I'm not trying to attack you in any hostile way either, and the fact is I can't seem to change your mind so why not try to for the sake of trying? I mean there's more to it than just codes. There's also mathematics and musical scores that fit with the mood of the passage. I know that last one sounds weird but seriously it's even encoded with a holy symphony. But by all means doubt. I doubt and have faith.

Evolution is one thing, science is one thing, God is another thing that invented these things in my humble opinion.




posted on May, 6 2009 @ 10:33 AM
link   
reply to post by cathedral
 


Hey just to let you know that if you calculate that name MITHRAS (another title of Maitreya) you get 666. Same with Maitreya in every single language that does it all having different numerical values for letters. Coincidence?

Also the New Testament is about taking sin from the world for the last time using a perfect man and is based on the precept that Jesus can do that.

The Old Testament starts with a man bringing sin into the world and losing perfection, and deals with the consequences of sinning. Back then it was not God who condoned but men, and thus the men had the free will to choose to be racist and into slavery. God is in control of history and it is under control. If there was a World War II you can be there will be one more, but not a IV because then we'd be fighting with sticks and stones.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 10:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by watchtheashes
reply to post by Welfhard
 


It doesn't contradict itself in any way that I know. If it seems that way simply refer to another scripture with the same symbols or meaning to clarify and don't interpret.


Using scripture to interpret scripture is like defining a word with that same word. It's circular logic.


Any contradictions are probably a minute translation error.


Some are but that means that god is not protecting the book from error. How do you rectify that?


History books agree in exact order with the events of the Bible. What's not cool is that history books are edited and manipulated to convey the wrong truths in schools. I'm not even referring to anything religious here. Ask any historian if a history book is reliable. It might be reliable to a point but then comes censorship and the Illuminati or just the author's bias.


The easiest example to demonstrate is Genesis and the garden of Eden. None of it happened. We evolved and spread throughout africa. Language itself did not appear till much later when humanity had already spread throughout the world.

Another example is the Hebrew slaves of Egypt and [sigh...] "Pharaoh". We have a solid understanding of Egypt's history and this never happened. There isn't any record of a Pharaoh named Pharaoh.


I admit to having a Biblical bias.


Meaning your perception of truth is instantly skewed. Until you put biases aside, you'll never see truth for what it is.


I also hear other people's ideas. I'm just trying to say that there is a wonderful thing about the world in which we live which 99% of the people on it miss out on.


???

1/3 of the world is Christian. What the hells are you talking about?

But you still haven't addressed all my points, particularly that a significant portion of Christianity is plagiarised from the ancient Egyptians.

[edit on 6-5-2009 by Welfhard]



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 10:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by watchtheashes
reply to post by Gawdzilla
 
Evolution is one thing, science is one thing, God is another thing that invented these things in my humble opinion.


The hard part for you would be demonstrate that God is needed in the sequence of life. Given an universe as large as we have, the chances that life appeared would seem to be very good. And there's too many problems with a "designer" for it to make sense at all. Nobody, for instance, wants to tell me why a "designer" would leave slime mold in charge of the planet for a billion years or more. Got any clues in your matrix on that one?



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Gawdzilla
 


Confrontation brings about understanding. How can one understand hot if they have never experienced cold? They could always be hot, but they wouldn't understand what that really meant unless they have experienced both temperatures.

Pretty much every religion in the history of man has spoken of this. In the hindu religion, the angels and the demons hug at the end of everything, because it's just a school to teach you to that effect.

I mean duh - "tree of knowledge", "to know both good and evil". Hello? How can you have knowledge of good if you do not have knowledge of evil and vice versa? Oh yeah, you can't.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 10:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by badmedia
reply to post by Gawdzilla
 
I mean duh - "tree of knowledge", "to know both good and evil". Hello? How can you have knowledge of good if you do not have knowledge of evil and vice versa? Oh yeah, you can't.





So, what does this have to do with the creationists claim that DNA is the "tree of Knowledge" that grew in the Garden of Eden? And, why plant the thing in the middle of the garden anyway? IF you believe the Anthology of Holey Stories, the whole problems of the world spring from a talking snake telling people that God had lied to them about the fatal effects of eating that fruit? "For thou shall surely die." Right. (The idea of leaving the world in the hands of two naked teenagers has been dealt with elsewhere.)



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 10:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Gawdzilla
 


I can look it up if I want I guess. I understand what you mean but what if that's how it had to be for the right kind of ecosystem to develop? Who is to say that the Designer would not have to do that for things to work out? I mean the people of old lived in ancient times. God would explain His design in terms that they could understand. I believe His power is not limited and that He is holy, but even without that viewpoint perhaps God is simply the ultimate scientist? Or rather experimenter?



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 10:57 AM
link   
reply to post by watchtheashes
 


666 right anyway do you know

Isaiah 5:20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

So let me ask you

Who was the first person/deity to lie in the bible?

Who was the first person/deity to tell the truth in the bible?

What would you think of a deity that controls someone’s mind to create maximum chaos?

What is the name of the religion that held mankind back for 1000 years? (Think a thousand years we could have been to the stars by now)

What is the name of the religion that tortured and burned people alive that disagreed with it?

What is the name of the religion that is known for destroying other cultures; including the culture that gave use the 2012 date?



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 11:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by watchtheashes
reply to post by Gawdzilla
 


I can look it up if I want I guess. I understand what you mean but what if that's how it had to be for the right kind of ecosystem to develop? Who is to say that the Designer would not have to do that for things to work out? I mean the people of old lived in ancient times. God would explain His design in terms that they could understand. I believe His power is not limited and that He is holy, but even without that viewpoint perhaps God is simply the ultimate scientist? Or rather experimenter?


Rationalizations. You are left, I think, without a support for a god at all. I came to that conclusion one half century ago.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 11:04 AM
link   
reply to post by watchtheashes
 


I mean the people of old lived in ancient times. God would explain His design in terms that they could understand.


People of ancient times are capable of as much understanding as we are, they weren't stupid, just ignorant. They learnt as they went along and all our knowledge is based on what they learnt long ago. Isaac Newton said he stood on the shoulders of scientists of the past.

God could have explained to the ancients how things began but he didn't. Instead with a question with no answer they ended up fabricating an answer, and guess what - it was wrong.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 11:08 AM
link   
reply to post by cathedral
 


Along that line of thought, here is another. One thing that makes no sense, even to a child, is why when it came to the devil, who was disguised as a serpent, God thought it would be a good idea to punish snakes instead of the devil!

Stupidest thing ever.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 11:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Welfhard
 


Not if the same symbols are present and mean more than one thing through out the Bible and it clarifies itself.

I rectify the translation errors as mistakes by men who can make mistakes. The best infallible codes would be in the Torah but translations would still have to have codes of some type that are relevant. In fact translating the New Testament into Hebrew gives you the same scale results as the Torah.

History books are not reliable much in the same way you think the Bible is not reliable.




Location of the Garden of Eden. It was on the Euphrates and Tigris rivers, at their junction with the Pishon and Gihon (Genesis 2:10-14). The Pishon and Gihon have not been identified. The Euphrates and Tigris rise in the Caucasus mountain region of southwest Asia, flow southeastward, and empty into the Persian Gulf. Man is said to have been created at about the center of the earth's surface; for this Caucasus-Euphrates region is approximate center of Eastern Hemisphere, which is the largest of the two Hemispheres. At present the Euphrates and Tigris unite about 100 miles above the Persian Gulf. In Abraham's day the Gulf extended inland as far as Ur, and the two rivers entered the Gulf by separate streams. In Adam's time, possibly, the two rivers may have united for a short distance, and divide again, before entering the Gulf; the Garden being on the united stream between the junction and separation of the rivers, making four branches or "heads" (Genesis 2:10); the two rivers continuing as the east and west coast of the Gulf, and called Gihon and Pishon. In ancient inscriptions the Persian Gulf was called a "river."


tiktaalik.uchicago.edu...

I think Garden of Eden is a literal place and synonymous for Earth. You would expect a creature like that to live there due to its tropical temperate nature and swampy river location.

gertoux.online.fr...

www.divinename.no...

I have Biblical bias in the sense that I believe science is not giving credit to the Designer. I believe that current theories are the real knowledge of the Creation Story. King James probably put in the days to put it in understandable context while being led by the Spirit to encode the English version in this erroneous ( but completely clear to understand) translation. Hebrew Bible just says that God created the heavens and the Earth and that's that.

I'm sure that about 75% of those Christians follow a Church lie or any denominational or dogma based lies that usually follow with them. I simply follow the teachings of Jesus Christ Himself and the Old Testament of The Holy Bible. I will teach anyone if they wish to learn regardless of who they are.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 11:25 AM
link   
reply to post by cathedral
 


My beliefs and religion are two different things. Religion is how Satan splits the masses. Or rather His Illuminati puppets. I'm a non-denominational follower of Christ.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 11:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Welfhard
 


I'm very aware of the capabilities of ancient man. I know they weren't stupid, they were lacking on quartz technology. Again it goes with the encoding as well.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 11:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Gawdzilla
 


My belief in God stems from unbelief. Eventually I found enough to stray from the wrong path(my wrong path not saying your path is wrong) into righteousness. My theories on this and that may or may not be wrong in your eyes, but they have nothing to do with my faith in God. That is from faith and faith alone. There is just supplements to the argument of faith. The fact that you are arguing faith and science is proving a point in the Bible in itself.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 11:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by watchtheashes
reply to post by Welfhard
 


Not if the same symbols are present and mean more than one thing through out the Bible and it clarifies itself.


You can't clarify something by making more convoluted. By trying to make sense of scripture with scripture, there is no telling how lost you could become, especially when you make context redundant.


I rectify the translation errors as mistakes by men who can make mistakes.


And god doesn't do anything about it. If he doesn't do anything about now, what makes you think he did anything when it was written? Men make mistakes. Yes. Men also wrote the bible.


The best infallible codes would be in the Torah but translations would still have to have codes of some type that are relevant. In fact translating the New Testament into Hebrew gives you the same scale results as the Torah.


Which is exactly what would happen if it all happened by chance.


History books are not reliable much in the same way you think the Bible is not reliable.


Yes but history books can cross corroborate each other aswell as contrast. Our understanding of history is not based on a single book.

What is funny is first you say that the history books agree with the bible, then you say that the history books aren't/cannot-be accurate making the bible inaccurate by your own words.




I have Biblical bias in the sense that I believe science is not giving credit to the Designer.


And your crying about that? When very few people can agree on the nature of god, you still think science should indulge in that politics? Science is the study of nature. God is not part of that as he wouldn't be naturalistic. That and all claims in science need to be falsifiable which god is not. Science ignores spirituality rather dilligently for this reason.


I believe that current theories are the real knowledge of the Creation Story. King James probably put in the days to put it in understandable context while being led by the Spirit to encode the English version in this erroneous ( but completely clear to understand) translation. Hebrew Bible just says that God created the heavens and the Earth and that's that.


It also describes earth as flat. Go figure.


I'm sure that about 75% of those Christians follow a Church lie or any denominational or dogma based lies that usually follow with them. I simply follow the teachings of Jesus Christ Himself and the Old Testament of The Holy Bible. I will teach anyone if they wish to learn regardless of who they are.


But they all will claim the same as you, so you could be the one missing out.


I'm very aware of the capabilities of ancient man. I know they weren't stupid, they were lacking on quartz technology. Again it goes with the encoding as well.


Meaning that god could have explained origins and they would have understood as well as we do - but he didn't, he left them hanging!


You're still ignoring Egypt.

[edit on 6-5-2009 by Welfhard]



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 11:56 AM
link   
somtimes someone dwells in a viewpoint which may lead towards a conclusion of no God or anything else. When he looks another way it can be resulting in a different approach, a different viewpoint. It depends on facts in or out of our minds.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Welfhard
 





You're still ignoring Egypt.


I didn't ignore Egypt. That is proof that the Divine Name was recognized by the Egyptians. It is right under the Garden of Eden thing.




You can't clarify something by making more convoluted. By trying to make sense of scripture with scripture, there is no telling how lost you could become, especially when you make context redundant.


Context is what makes the meanings different in cases where the symbolic references are literal and literal references may turn symbolic. The verses and text clarify what means what. If you're going to prove that would you not use the Bible itself?




And god doesn't do anything about it. If he doesn't do anything about now, what makes you think he did anything when it was written? Men make mistakes. Yes. Men also wrote the bible.


Men led by the Hand of God. The point is not translation errors as God directly gave the Torah to Moses at Mt. Sinai, but the message of the book. He also gave men their own time of government to prove they would fail miserably at fair governance by humanity.




Which is exactly what would happen if it all happened by chance.


The statistical chance in the universe is far smaller than most significant matrices as defined by statisticians and probability.




Yes but history books can cross corroborate each other as well as contrast. Our understanding of history is not based on a single book. What is funny is first you say that the history books agree with the bible, then you say that the history books aren't/cannot-be accurate making the bible inaccurate by your own words.


Okay. You're right about this one. I didn't mean to say that history books agree with the Bible(humans make mistakes), but that historians and history as defined by a majority of evidence with respect to the historians accurate knowledge of their subject support the chronology of events. It can't all be totally accurate, but the Bible shows itself to not contradict every historical event it depicts. Pharaoh instead of Amenhotep III. So they didn't name the man...well the man didn't acknowledge their God either...




And your crying about that?




No I'm not crying about it. Just trying to say credit is due when you're not giving thanks to the Creator for the creation. You don't believe in that, I do.




It also describes earth as flat. Go figure.


Isaiah 40:22
"It is He who sits above the 'circle' of the earth and it's inhabitants are like grasshoppers."

I know it doesn't say sphere, but they probably thought circular anyway due to the horizon and movement of the stars. I'm sure God has a plan for history(look at that word closely) and wouldn't reveal all knowledge to the ancients. There IS a prophetical last generation you know, in which "the true knowledge would become abundant and many would travel to and fro."

In 8th Century BC by the way Isaiah predicted:

Isaiah also correctly prophesied that Babylon would be attacked by the Medes, that the Babylonian empire would be overthrown (Isa.13:19) trees would flourish again in the desert areas of Israel(Isa.41:18-20),that Israel, a barren land would distribute fruit to the whole world one day(Isa.27:6), that God would return the Jews to their homeland(Isa. 43:5-6), as well as many prophecies about the Messiah-being buried in a rich man's tomb, being crucified with criminals, suffering and being rejected, wounded and whipped, being made a guilt offering and bearing the punishment for our sins (Isa.53)





But they all will claim the same as you, so you could be the one missing out.
.

Nope. They're missing out on plain truth due to corruption. I will willingly go to a church that is not selective on who they pick and who doesn't really care for donations of money for "charity." Nothing else though.




Meaning that god could have explained origins and they would have understood as well as we do - but he didn't, he left them hanging!


That would defeat the purpose of the timing of the Universe and history(again look at that word closely.)



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 12:13 PM
link   
To all those Christians worrying about micro-chip implants from the new world order

Hypnotist office:
Close your eyes, relax and listen to the sound of my voice.

Church:
bow your head Close your eyes – let us pray

Functionally the same thing

And if there is such a thing as a mind control chip you know it would be used on the free thinkers/atheist ect, to much cheering from the Christians.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 12:20 PM
link   
reply to post by cathedral
 


Actually no I don't think it is a good thing for either of them to be chipped. The penalty is death regardless and that's not from a religious standpoint. They've already got guillotines ready for those who will not take it. Yes you hear right guillotines.

I'm not happy with most of the things our government does, and chipping is not an exception under the guise of safety.

That's a nightmare for anyone really. A micro-chip that causes cancer??? (which is predicted in Revelation already mind you as the word "sores" not "tumor")





new topics
top topics
 
30
<< 39  40  41    43  44  45 >>

log in

join