I'm not going to force any one too believe in something but, I believe in Jesus Christ which means I'm an christan.. in fact I was born in an christan family.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Every puffin we see tonight is a miracle" - Stephen Kress
well, i am mainly atheist, though, with atheism there are those empty gaps, like when did time start, what happens after death, and stuff similar to that, basically everything science cant answer, so, i looked around a bit, and figured, witch religion makes most sense, i previously liked the idea of reincarnation, but didn't know too much about religion at the time, one day i was playing a game with my friend, we where talking about 2012, and he said in the Buddhist bible, it says its a hoax, and i asked him a bit about Buddhism, and i found, its exactly what i wanted, so, i still adore science, and then, i just combined the two, to make my current religious standpoint, and that is, a science Buddhist mix, it makes the most sense, and i get to keep believing what i wanter
I'm not going to force any one too believe in something but, I believe in Jesus Christ which means I'm an christan.. in fact I was born in an christan family.
Telling me that you are a Christian tells me nothing at all. There are over 1,000 denominations of Christianity, all claiming to be the right one, and many are so incredibly different than the others that it might be innacurate to say that they are the same religion at all. Don't give me a label for what you believe, tell me the actual claims you believe and why I should follow them as well.
Quote from Owl9 »
I could probably be christian in a way
Because the idea that mankind is in charge of itself is scary
If there isn't a god, that doesn't mean that mankind is in charge of itself. It means that mankind is in charge of each other. Societies in which rape and murder are permissible are always less affluent than those that practice equality and enforce human rights. It's a sort of a "natural selection of cultures" that causes societies to fail if they don't lead to the welfare of the middle class.
Quote from Cassian »
well, i am mainly atheist, though, with atheism there are those empty gaps, like when did time start, what happens after death, and stuff similar to that, basically everything science cant answer, so, i looked around a bit, and figured, witch religion makes most sense, i previously liked the idea of reincarnation, but didn't know too much about religion at the time, one day i was playing a game with my friend, we where talking about 2010, and he said in the Buddhist bible, it says its a hoax, and i asked him a bit about Buddhism, and i found, its exactly what i wanted, so, i still adore science, and then, i just combined the two, to make my current religious standpoint, and that is, a science Buddhist mix, it makes the most sense, and i get to keep believing what i wanter
What kind of Buddhism do you support? Theravada? Mahayana? Maybe Vajrayana? Moreover, what evidence do you have that any facet of your particular brand of Buddhism is actually true?
And you say these are "things science can't answer"? Well just because we can't answer them now doesn't mean we never will. Furthermore, all of those questions HAVE been answered by science. Time started at the moment of the big bang. The singularity that would expand into our universe was probably a singularity present in another universe, and when it became unstable it began to expand rapidly, generating separate time and space from its parent universe.
Lastly, just because we dont' have an answer to a question doens't mean we are justified in following whatever superstition claims to have an answer. If you don't know, then the correct answer is not "My religion tells me this, so it must be true", instead its "I don't know, but let's find out".
FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU
NO
the big bang theory does NOT cover the creation of space and or time just why it is expanding
I try and keep an open mind. I believe in something, but I refuse to support any one particular view because at the end of the day there are infinite possibilities. You could believe that God is a monkey and that He peeled the universe from a banana if you want. You instead might think that's preposterous but given the infinite number of potentialities I believe that to firmly attach to any one is to blind yourself of the big picture.
There are not infinite possibilities. There are some beliefs that are mutually exclusive, others that contradict others, and some that contradict themselves. And no matter how many possibilities there are, there is only one right answer, and that would be whichever one lines up with the truth.
Quote from killer2329 »
Quote from Nazzer »
Time started at the moment of the big bang.
FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU
NO
the big bang theory does NOT cover the creation of space and or time just why it is expanding
Correct. But I did not say that the Big Bang theory explained time, I said that we have possible answers to how time came to be, and the most prevalent all involve time starting at the big bang, be this start the first of a chain or a "reboot" after a series of successive expansions and contractions. Just because one hypothesis uses a theory does not mean that the hypothesis is a part of said theory.
well, i am mainly atheist, though, with atheism there are those empty gaps, like when did time start, what happens after death, and stuff similar to that, basically everything science cant answer, so, i looked around a bit, and figured, witch religion makes most sense, i previously liked the idea of reincarnation, but didn't know too much about religion at the time, one day i was playing a game with my friend, we where talking about 2010, and he said in the Buddhist bible, it says its a hoax, and i asked him a bit about Buddhism, and i found, its exactly what i wanted, so, i still adore science, and then, i just combined the two, to make my current religious standpoint, and that is, a science Buddhist mix, it makes the most sense, and i get to keep believing what i wanter
What kind of Buddhism do you support? Theravada? Mahayana? Maybe Vajrayana? Moreover, what evidence do you have that any facet of your particular brand of Buddhism is actually true?
And you say these are "things science can't answer"? Well just because we can't answer them now doesn't mean we never will. Furthermore, all of those questions HAVE been answered by science. Time started at the moment of the big bang. The singularity that would expand into our universe was probably a singularity present in another universe, and when it became unstable it began to expand rapidly, generating separate time and space from its parent universe.
Lastly, just because we dont' have an answer to a question doens't mean we are justified in following whatever superstition claims to have an answer. If you don't know, then the correct answer is not "My religion tells me this, so it must be true", instead its "I don't know, but let's find out".
Well, i am not too Buddhist, so i don't really have a kind, i don't know to much about it, just what i want to know.
You kinda took this a bit to far, and went a bit out of the proper range here, of course they will be answered and then i will take that up, but, for now, i do not know the proper answer, and so, i need to turn to something else, and, what was before the big bang? thats what i'm meaning, i get how everything in this universe started when the big bang happened, i'm not that stupid, your taking things too far.
I did not say what i believe is true, and anyone who is arguing a point i have made, i will take it in and figure out from that, i never said i was right, and, you know, i probably am wrong, but this makes most sense from my mind, and it is what i will go with, until someone proves me wrong, or i find a even better way of it, i am more saying 'well this is what i believe, lets find out if its right or not'
Big Bang is not THE recipe for the universe, time nor matter. It is just the most widely accepted explanation, and somehow the most logical. A few hundred years ago, the Earth was actually flat, according to the leading scientists and public opinions.
Also, on topic, i have no particular religion or beliefs beyond human capability, but i still do not like to adress myself as atheist
Why can't they? I personally think it's good to believe, sometimes. I mean, would you rather have the diagnosis of "You have cancer with no hope of living and there is no heaven," or "You have cancer, but God is on your side, and Heaven will be waiting for you if you die"?
Because there are laws to the human race, we could probably never learn anything that has to do with those laws. So no, you can't do every science experiment with a controlled test. Because raping babies is illegal.
San tropez, that argument is fallacious. Not only was it widely accepted that the earth was round 100 years ago, but at no point is it accurate to say that scientists ever believed it was flat. In the days that most people believed the earth was flat, not only was the scientific method barely developed, but the few people that could have been called scientists actually did realize it was round. Even Aristotle, who lived far more than 100, or even 1000 years ago, realized that the Earth was probably round, given that its shadow on the moon was always a circle, not an oval, and that at any given point in the ocean a ship's mast would be first visible over the horizon, and only later its hull. Furthermore, attempts were made multiple times in history to publicize the round earth model, but the Catholic church was quick to silence those who disagreed with the flat Earth described in the bible.
Quote from KatamariManatee »
Quote from Nazzer »
Rambling.
...Nazzer?
Quote from Nazzer »
Rambling..
...Nazzer...?
Quote from Nazzer »
Rambling...
NAZZER! SNAP OUT OF IT!
People can believe what they what.
Why can't they? I personally think it's good to believe, sometimes. I mean, would you rather have the diagnosis of "You have cancer with no hope of living and there is no heaven," or "You have cancer, but God is on your side, and Heaven will be waiting for you if you die"?
Because there are laws to the human race, we could probably never learn anything that has to do with those laws. So no, you can't do every science experiment with a controlled test. Because raping babies is illegal.
Good god man. I'm just having a discussion. That's all. I'm not making religion illegal, or even suggesting that it be illegal. I'm not saying "YOU GUISE ARE ALL STOOPID HURDY HURRRR". I'm having a calm reasoned discussion with consenting participants.
And addressing your question, no. I would rather have doctors on my side than to have someone tell me "It's okay, just accept it, because you'll be going to heaven". Why? Because any creator deity capable of preventing said cancer, but not willing to, is not deserving of my worship.
And besides, you just presented a false dichotomy. If a doctor tells me I have, say, a progressing brain tumor pushing on my cerebellum, he won't say "you have no hope of living and there is no heaven". He will say that they are doing everything they can. And what's more important? THEY ACTUALLY WILL BE DOING EVERYTHING THEY CAN.
The idea that I might survive my own death is indeed a comforting one. But just because something would be comforting to one degree does not mean that it is more desirable than something else. Sure, it may be comforting to be given a morphine drip when I'm in pain, but I'd rather be in pain and have doctors working around the clock on a hopeless condition than be given a morphine drip and have them just try to make my passing "more comfortable". A small degree of real hope is more desirable to me than a large degree of false hope.
George Bernard Shaw said something I like quite a bit. He said "The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality of happiness, and by no means a necessity of life. "
Finally, I don't see what you are getting at with your last point about raping babies. Did i ever say something to that effect?
Here's your chance to make your case to me. I'll be civil, calm, and considerate to most beliefs, unless they are completely disgusting.
Basically, answer the questions What do you believe, why do you believe it, and why do you think I, or anyone else, should believe it?
^^My blog^^
if you cant prove it beyond a reasonable doubt i wont believe it and something supernatural cant be proven either way
Because the idea that mankind is in charge of itself is scary
Telling me that you are a Christian tells me nothing at all. There are over 1,000 denominations of Christianity, all claiming to be the right one, and many are so incredibly different than the others that it might be innacurate to say that they are the same religion at all. Don't give me a label for what you believe, tell me the actual claims you believe and why I should follow them as well.
If there isn't a god, that doesn't mean that mankind is in charge of itself. It means that mankind is in charge of each other. Societies in which rape and murder are permissible are always less affluent than those that practice equality and enforce human rights. It's a sort of a "natural selection of cultures" that causes societies to fail if they don't lead to the welfare of the middle class.
What kind of Buddhism do you support? Theravada? Mahayana? Maybe Vajrayana? Moreover, what evidence do you have that any facet of your particular brand of Buddhism is actually true?
And you say these are "things science can't answer"? Well just because we can't answer them now doesn't mean we never will. Furthermore, all of those questions HAVE been answered by science. Time started at the moment of the big bang. The singularity that would expand into our universe was probably a singularity present in another universe, and when it became unstable it began to expand rapidly, generating separate time and space from its parent universe.
Lastly, just because we dont' have an answer to a question doens't mean we are justified in following whatever superstition claims to have an answer. If you don't know, then the correct answer is not "My religion tells me this, so it must be true", instead its "I don't know, but let's find out".
^^My blog^^
FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU
NO
the big bang theory does NOT cover the creation of space and or time just why it is expanding
Crud, im now curious.
facepalm of the month- dra6o0n
There are not infinite possibilities. There are some beliefs that are mutually exclusive, others that contradict others, and some that contradict themselves. And no matter how many possibilities there are, there is only one right answer, and that would be whichever one lines up with the truth.
Correct. But I did not say that the Big Bang theory explained time, I said that we have possible answers to how time came to be, and the most prevalent all involve time starting at the big bang, be this start the first of a chain or a "reboot" after a series of successive expansions and contractions. Just because one hypothesis uses a theory does not mean that the hypothesis is a part of said theory.
^^My blog^^
Well, i am not too Buddhist, so i don't really have a kind, i don't know to much about it, just what i want to know.
You kinda took this a bit to far, and went a bit out of the proper range here, of course they will be answered and then i will take that up, but, for now, i do not know the proper answer, and so, i need to turn to something else, and, what was before the big bang? thats what i'm meaning, i get how everything in this universe started when the big bang happened, i'm not that stupid, your taking things too far.
I did not say what i believe is true, and anyone who is arguing a point i have made, i will take it in and figure out from that, i never said i was right, and, you know, i probably am wrong, but this makes most sense from my mind, and it is what i will go with, until someone proves me wrong, or i find a even better way of it, i am more saying 'well this is what i believe, lets find out if its right or not'
Also, on topic, i have no particular religion or beliefs beyond human capability, but i still do not like to adress myself as atheist
...Nazzer?
...Nazzer...?
NAZZER! SNAP OUT OF IT!
People can believe what they what.
Why can't they? I personally think it's good to believe, sometimes. I mean, would you rather have the diagnosis of "You have cancer with no hope of living and there is no heaven," or "You have cancer, but God is on your side, and Heaven will be waiting for you if you die"?
Because there are laws to the human race, we could probably never learn anything that has to do with those laws. So no, you can't do every science experiment with a controlled test. Because raping babies is illegal.
Good god man. I'm just having a discussion. That's all. I'm not making religion illegal, or even suggesting that it be illegal. I'm not saying "YOU GUISE ARE ALL STOOPID HURDY HURRRR". I'm having a calm reasoned discussion with consenting participants.
And addressing your question, no. I would rather have doctors on my side than to have someone tell me "It's okay, just accept it, because you'll be going to heaven". Why? Because any creator deity capable of preventing said cancer, but not willing to, is not deserving of my worship.
And besides, you just presented a false dichotomy. If a doctor tells me I have, say, a progressing brain tumor pushing on my cerebellum, he won't say "you have no hope of living and there is no heaven". He will say that they are doing everything they can. And what's more important? THEY ACTUALLY WILL BE DOING EVERYTHING THEY CAN.
The idea that I might survive my own death is indeed a comforting one. But just because something would be comforting to one degree does not mean that it is more desirable than something else. Sure, it may be comforting to be given a morphine drip when I'm in pain, but I'd rather be in pain and have doctors working around the clock on a hopeless condition than be given a morphine drip and have them just try to make my passing "more comfortable". A small degree of real hope is more desirable to me than a large degree of false hope.
George Bernard Shaw said something I like quite a bit. He said "The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality of happiness, and by no means a necessity of life. "
Finally, I don't see what you are getting at with your last point about raping babies. Did i ever say something to that effect?
^^My blog^^
5/19/13 Expect Us
facepalm of the month- dra6o0n
I'm actually a unitarian
Yes, actually. You said that science will be able to find out everything.
That's includes the science of raping babies.
Also, it a matter of philosophical debate. Some say god doesn't save people because he has different plans for them.
That's the stupidest thing I have ever heard in my entire life.
PS: Atheist =/= scientist, and nor are having a religious view and being a scientist mutually exclusive.
5/19/13 Expect Us