What's with all of the weird religious page messages?? - Page 6 - maemo.org

Active Topics

The N900 is now 15 years old! (9)
to Nokia N900 by Arno_11 - 4 hrs, 44 mins ago
Sailfish OS for the Motorola Moto G7 Power (XT1955-5) - (ocean) (4)
to SailfishOS by Maemish - 5 days, 17 hrs ago
more...

Page 6 of 7

« First

< Prev

Next >

Thread Tools

	mullf	2009-11-15 , 23:50
	Posts: 610 \| Thanked: 391 times \| Joined on Feb 2006 @ DC, USA	#51

Originally Posted by christexaport

So if I can predict a historical event from the 20th century down to the exact year using just the Bible, would that not be proof?.

It's easy to "predict" events that already happened.

__________________
Nokia 770 Internet Tablet = best device ever made

Deuteronomy 13:6-10; 2 Kings 2:23-24; Judges 19:22-29

The Following User Says Thank You to mullf For This Useful Post:
NvyUs

	Texrat	2009-11-16 , 00:01
	Posts: 11,700 \| Thanked: 10,045 times \| Joined on Jun 2006 @ North Texas, USA	#52

Originally Posted by christexaport

I disagree, and can prove to you the divinity of God's Word, the BIble, in a scientific and mathematical manner via a PM to any that are interested. I'm dying to show any doubters the light if they wish to see it.

I believe in a higher power, but I gotta call BS on that one Chris. I've seen the so-called "proofs" of things spiritual but they really aren't. Yeah, they look and sound really nifty but they're not scientific. Just as Creationism doesn't qualify as a theory.

Besides, that's a dangerous road to go down anyway. People are told they should be able to suspend disbelief and accept certain things on faith, and then 'just in case' that fails here's this series of "proofs" to help the agnostic out. Defeats the whole premise of faith.

__________________
Nokia Developer Champion
Different <> Wrong | Listen - Judgment = Progress | People + Trust = Success
My personal site: http://texrat.net

The Following User Says Thank You to Texrat For This Useful Post:
RevdKathy

	dormant	2009-11-16 , 00:10
	Posts: 332 \| Thanked: 76 times \| Joined on Oct 2007 @ St. Augustine, Trinidad and Tobago	#53

Originally Posted by christexaport

I disagree, and can prove to you the divinity of God's Word, the BIble, in a scientific and mathematical manner via a PM to any that are interested.

Please do. Note that I am a non-believer and am only asking for this so that I can check out your "scientific and mathematical manner".

__________________

N900
N800
LD-3W
two magic OTG USB adapters
crossed fingers

CrashandDie	2009-11-16 , 00:17
Posts: 336 \| Thanked: 610 times \| Joined on Apr 2008 @ France	#54

Originally Posted by christexaport

That is your opinion. There is only one Almighty God, and I've seen no evidence to the contrary. He has strict instructions on how to live our lives, and this is the definition of religion as I speak it. And its for all man that chooses Him.

Wow, that is just so cliché. And I thought you zealots had been buried a long time ago. Just because you don't have evidence to the contrary doesn't mean something exists.

I'll use one of Bertrand Russel's analogies for this, as it is quite appropriate with your arguments:

Originally Posted by Bertrand Russel

If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time.

I would even go further, and quote Ockham's touchy little sentence: "entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem". In other words: as there is no absolute possibility to prove either the existence of a supreme being, or its non-existence, the obvious solution is the simplest one: there is no supreme being.

Originally Posted by christexaport

So if I can predict a historical event from the 20th century down to the exact year using just the Bible, would that not be proof? I'd take bets if it weren't a religious subject. I love showing people that, unlike the Quran, Book of Mormon, and other "holy" books, only the Bible is devine. Its the only one that exhibits supernatural powers no other book has.

If you could, that would be quite interesting. Yet, you are as arrogant as all religious people who dare get into such conversation, and immediately diss other religious books. How can a book exhibit supernatural powers? Does it float around your house? Does it do your dishes? Do you jump on it twice and it teleports you to another galaxy? If you rub it gently, does it moan under your tender palms and psalms?

You have no proof. Other than being another person with a twisted inflection on something which was written by hundreds of people, translated by dozens (hence, the original meaning must be quite far from what we have now). The Bible itself is full of mistakes and contradictions. For instance, Genesis 1 and 2 disagree about the order in which things are created, and how satisfied God is about the results of his labors. The flood story is really two interwoven stories that contradict each other on how many of each kind of animal are to be brought into the Ark--is it one pair each or seven pairs each of the "clean" ones? The Gospel of John disagrees with the other three Gospels on the activities of Jesus Christ (how long had he stayed in Jerusalem--a couple of days or a whole year?) and all four Gospels contradict each other on the details of Jesus Christ's last moments and resurrection. The Gospels of Matthew and Luke contradict each other on the genealogy of Jesus Christ's father; though both agree that Joseph was not his real father. Repetitions and contradictions are understandable for a hodgepodge collection of documents, but not for some carefully constructed treatise, reflecting a well-thought-out plan.

Pretty holy, that book of yours, eh? Or maybe you'll choose to ignore all the horrible things that are said in it? Do you carefully choose to ignore the passages where plainly, it is pure horror that is displayed?

Originally Posted by The Book of Judges, Chapter 19

And he said unto him, We are passing from Beth-lehem-judah toward the side of mount Ephraim; from thence am I: and I went to Beth-lehem-judah, but I am now going to the house of the Lord; and there is no man that receiveth me to house.

Yet there is both straw and provender for our asses; and there is bread and wine also for me, and for thy handmaid, and for the young man which is with thy servants: there is no want of any thing.

And the old man said, Peace be with thee; howsoever, let all thy wants lie upon me; only lodge not in the street.

So he brought him into his house, and gave provender unto the asses: and they washed their feet, and did eat and drink.

Now as they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of the city, certain sons of Belial, beset the house round about, and beat at the door, and spake to the master of the house, the old man, saying, Bring forth the man that came into thine house, that we may know him.

And the man, the master of the house, went out unto them, and said unto them, Nay, my brethren, nay, I pray you, do not so wickedly; seeing that this man is come into mine house, do not this folly.

Behold, here is my daughter a maiden, and his concubine; them I will bring out now, and humble ye them, and do with them what seemeth good unto you: but unto this man do not so vile a thing.

But the men would not hearken to him: so the man took his concubine, and brought her forth unto them; and they knew her, and abused her all the night until the morning: and when the day began to spring, they let her go.

In other words, a man accepts a stranger into his house, and offers him food and a roof. Then other men come to the house and demand to see the stranger. The owner refuses to present the stranger, but in order to appease their anger, offers his daughter -- a virgin -- and the maid, in sacrifice.

Oh, yeah, your book is all too easy to defend now, is it?

Originally Posted by christexaport

I don't find the battle endless, and don't see it as a battle at all. I'll hush you up in a second. I'm just offering you a chance to learn. You don't have to accept, but you have to suffer the consequence of ignoring the Truth.

That's where you're wrong. I am free to ignore whatever I please. As you can read above, I am not completely ignorant on the matter. I have studied the Bible, as most of my family is religious, and they have passed a good deal of their beliefs through me, however, that doesn't mean I have to believe.

Originally Posted by christexaport

I accept people of all faiths, but only subscribe to the one laid out in the Bible.

You don't accept other faiths. You just said earlier their books weren't holy, thus you just downgraded their "belief" to an infantile foreplay before they come to realise "Your Truth".

I don't mind the occasional Religious War, but seriously, with that kind of convictions?

The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to CrashandDie For This Useful Post:
Aphex, daperl, JayBomb999, JayOnThaBeat, mullf, thecursedfly, zerojay

	zerojay	2009-11-16 , 00:22
	Posts: 2,669 \| Thanked: 2,555 times \| Joined on Apr 2007 @ Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada	#55

The amazing thing about religious people is how great they are at spinning. Even better than Fox News.

The Bible doesn't quote a specific date on anything. For the book to predict anything, it must be a specific date, not a vague reference to it. It must be "August 22nd, 2009", and not "when the sun comes up red on a cloudy day when the rain comes..."

If the book claims one thing, and something else happens instead, they will twist it around so that they are somehow right anyways.

Religion is a crutch for the weak and weak-minded because mankind can't understand that there are some things beyond his feeble mind, that they cannot understand or explain... and when that happens, they worry and get freaked out... so someone comes along and tries to explain it one way or another which may or may not be anywhere near the actual truth. It's far easier for man to think there's a dude up in the clouds that decided his mom should die of cancer today than it is to think that her defences finally gave up.

That little N900 you've been wanting or have been holding in your hands? You'd be crucified as a witch and burned at the stake over it not that long ago.

Now can we please stop all this ******ed **** all over TMO, please?

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to zerojay For This Useful Post:
Aphex, JayOnThaBeat

Aphex	2009-11-16 , 00:52
Posts: 10 \| Thanked: 4 times \| Joined on Nov 2009 @ Inner Universe	#56

I don't like to repeat myself, but I'll do an exception xD

Dear Chris,

I am very conscious of your belief & I feel that what your belief is not coming from your heart, instead it's just from books & brainwashed people.

The bible is only a reason to control people & was probably not even meant to have this sort of impact to the human nation. Religion at the extent as you describe is sickness. A "God", in other words a "high power", can be anything you wish. A magical spirit in the universe who listens to our prayers & created two people to lead a planet is a bit of a fairy tale to me

The bible has been corrupted so many times & it's nothing like what it was at an original point. It sounds like it was a farmer who decided to write a "book" with rules & regulations on how to live, with some sort of "Boss" who controls everything & if you dare to do wrong, this "MARVELLOUS GOD" will punish you to hell so you can rot & suffer for the rest of your life. Hehe, funny.

Anyway, as long as you're happy the way you are leading your life (like I previously said) then I am happy for you

Last edited by Aphex; 2009-11-16 at 00:56.

	Texrat	2009-11-16 , 00:55
	Posts: 11,700 \| Thanked: 10,045 times \| Joined on Jun 2006 @ North Texas, USA	#57

Let's disagree without getting ugly, eh guys?

__________________
Nokia Developer Champion
Different <> Wrong | Listen - Judgment = Progress | People + Trust = Success
My personal site: http://texrat.net

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Texrat For This Useful Post:
buurmas, JayOnThaBeat, lschumanfcoe, RevdKathy

Aphex	2009-11-16 , 00:58
Posts: 10 \| Thanked: 4 times \| Joined on Nov 2009 @ Inner Universe	#58

Originally Posted by Texrat

Let's disagree without getting ugly, eh guys?

Your blogs are very good. Respect

lschumanfcoe	2009-11-16 , 01:16
Posts: 54 \| Thanked: 36 times \| Joined on Jul 2009 @ Central Valley, California, USA	#59

Wow, this is a tough one. While on the one hand I can see people being offended by a religious statement of condemnation and self-righteousness, I can also see people being offended by statements like: "religion is based on fear"; "religion is for the weak-minded"; etc. etc. That's just silly.

I'm from the United States, where - unlike most of Europe - religious beliefs and spirituality dominate public and private life. Although Christianity forms the majority, every faith known to humanity has taken root and flourished. Communities are successful whose members can find common ground and mutual respect. The first example that comes to mind (it's been a long day and I'm tired) is from an outspokenly atheistic band called Bad Religion. The lyricist and singer, with a doctorate in biology and evolution, has very good friends that are Christians. The band's bass player is religious. I myself am a believer; one of my good friends and colleagues, a true professional whom I respect and rely upon, is proudly agnostic. I don't charge over to him with a religious tract and he knows that my faith doesn't come from "weak-mindedness" and fear. Do we sometimes talk about our positions? Of course. Respect - and a healthy does of humor - are key.

Can't a discussion within this community have a level of mutual respect?