Religion: what is it good for? Absolutely nothing! Huah!

[Cubemario]

"Who here actually believes the shroud of turin is proof of jesus?"

I don't really care, and i'm a christian. I know very little about the turin to. I don't base my faith in Jesus, who he is, and what he did because of a piece of cloth. I originally based my faith on Jesus by what the bible says about him and believing what was written. I confessed him as my lord and saviour as well. It was a harmless thing to do, so I took the chance. Not too long after I had all the proof I needed to keep my faith. The bible really explains it all.

"Knock and it shall be open to you, seek and you shall find" "I stand at the door and knock" "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen"

It's a different approach to what the world teaches. Most of us were taught to see the evidence first, then believe. Christianity and the bible teach the exact opposite. If that explanation isn't good enough, fine. That's the honest truth about it. Answers aren't going to be easily found through any other resources but faith. Lets face it, proving that Jesus existed (never mind still exists today) through science is highly unlikely and if such evidence would be brought up, it would no doubt not be hard evidence. This all happened so long ago, were talking 2000+ years ago, that's a long time. Even if it was proved through science that he indeed existed, it still wouldn't change anything. The miracles Jesus performed defy science, the resurrection of the dead defies science, people can still choose not to believe those key points, and it wouldn't make a difference.

I already explained faith and science well enough in a post back in the topic, feel free to go back and look at it if you like, I won't repeat myself.

Bottom line, you take the genuine leap of faith in Jesus, what he did, and what he stands for, confess him your lord, continue to pursue him. Then you see results, then you see proof.

 

[AltF4]

Science Check!

All the matter in the previous universe condensed in one single spot thanks to a phenomenon called the Big Crunch.

There is absolutely no basis for this statement. It's nonsense to even think of "time before" the big bang. Because even if it existed, no information from any previous universes can have passed through to ours.

But there was so much matter in that single spot that it couldn't hold together anymore and it simply exploded. Its like when you put too much air in a balloon.

Now that is complete garbage through and through. It is wrong both conceptually and technically.. I wouldn't even know where to begin.

There you have the Big Bang. Slowly after that the galaxies started to form, and the stars and the planets.

Galaxy formation is a big problem right now for astronomy. There is no current theory that accurately predicts galaxy formation from a singularity. It's not as simple as "they just formed".

Even our galaxy is set on a collision course with the Andromeda Galaxy!

This part is actually true.

Also, scientific research shows that a Big Crunch will happen in the universe. So I guess then a Big Bang will happen again and another universe will be created.

Completely wrong again. In fact, it is quite the opposite. It is well known that galaxies are accelerating away from each other, and will never again meet in a big crunch.

 

[~N9NE~]

Your Religion has made a perfect system in which it simply cannot be wrong if you have faith. That alone should be enough to make you wonder. There is insurance in place for that too though, it's called Hell.

I'm a very strong Catholic, yet I still acknowledge the chance exists that my religion may be wrong. That's just human nature to doubt something at times.

Most people are not on the side of science because they whole heartedly believe in the Big Bang, but because it is the side that encourages questions.

I believe religion also encourages questions. Questions about ourselves, society and the world around us. Science and religion just have different answers to certain questions.

 

[espio87]

Science Check!

heh, it seems I assimilated so much my own theory of the universe that I actually forgot about the current Big Bang theory.

 

[Aesir]

Galaxy formation is a big problem right now for astronomy. There is no current theory that accurately predicts galaxy formation from a singularity. It's not as simple as "they just formed".

Nebular Hypothesis, does a pretty good job explaining that.

 

[otter]

I believe religion also encourages questions. Questions about ourselves, society and the world around us. Science and religion just have different answers to certain questions.

Asking questions and having faith are exact opposites by design. I'm sure all Christians doubt at times, but I wouldn't admit it and then show up at the gossip-fest known as church.

 

[CivicSmash]

Science Check!




There is absolutely no basis for this statement. It's nonsense to even think of "time before" the big bang. Because even if it existed, no information from any previous universes can have passed through to ours.



Now that is complete garbage through and through. It is wrong both conceptually and technically.. I wouldn't even know where to begin.



Galaxy formation is a big problem right now for astronomy. There is no current theory that accurately predicts galaxy formation from a singularity. It's not as simple as "they just formed".



This part is actually true.



Completely wrong again. In fact, it is quite the opposite. It is well known that galaxies are accelerating away from each other, and will never again meet in a big crunch.

Reality Check!
AltF4Warrior

Wow. Ummm.....Please never have a science check again, because you really dont know what you are talking about at all. The big crunch happened, and it is very real, and this is agreed upon among scientists. It is included within the big bang theory. The only reason that it still holds the label "theory" is due to crazy religious nuts. It is accepted as fact by all scientists. Why is it nonsense to think of time before the big bang? It would be nonsense to think that time didn't exist before that. All of the matter in the universe will eventually get condensed into the size of a period. Then there will be another big bang. It is a fact that the universe is currently expanding, scientists can even measure the rate at which it is growing. It is also a known fact by scientists that the universe will slowly stop expanding and start to collapse back within itself. Do not say this is untrue, go read a book. What do you mean when you say that no previous information could be passed on to this universe? Ive been thinking about it for a while and i have no clue. Do you mean matter? Because all of the matter in the universe now is the exact same matter as in previous universes. The EXACT same amounts too, actually. Matter is neither created nor destroyed. Scientists even know where the center of the universe is, and where the universe will collapse into itself, and eventually create a big bang all over again.

 

[espio87]

Reality Check!
AltF4Warrior

Wow. Ummm.....Please never have a science check again, because you really dont know what you are talking about at all. The big crunch happened, and it is very real, and this is agreed upon among scientists. It is included within the big bang theory. Why is it nonsense to think of time before the big bang? It would be nonsense to think that time didn't exist before that. All of the matter in the universe will eventually get condensed into the size of a period. Then there will be another big bang. It is a fact that the universe is currently expanding, scientists can even measure the rate at which it is growing. It is also a known fact by scientists that the universe will slowly stop expanding and start to collapse back within itself. Do not say this is untrue, go read a book. What do you mean when you say that no previous information could be passed on to this universe? Ive been thinking about it for a while and i have no clue. Do you mean matter? Because all of the matter in the universe now is the exact same matter as in previous universes. The exact same amounts too, actually. Matter is neither created nor destroyed. Scientists even know where the center of the universe is, and where the universe will collapse into itself, and have a big bang all over again.

wow, I was right all along. yay for me!

 

[arrowhead]

matter in the universe is accelerating at a rate where the gravitational pull is too weak to condense the matter into one point. think of asymptotes

 

[CivicSmash]

matter in the universe is accelerating at a rate where the gravitational pull is too weak to condense the matter into one point. think of asymptotes

nope, wrong. The big crunch technically isnt included in the big bang theory, i was wrong. But the big crunch is still the most widely accepted ultimate fate of the universe.
Also, just because it is expanding to fast to collapse now, doesn't mean that this will be the case eons in the future. The expaning universe doesn't have an infinite amount of energy to just keep expanding for all of time. It can and will reverse.

 

[arrowhead]

yes it does. again, think of asymptotes. as the universe expands, matter separates. the velocity relative to the center of mass decreases, but the magnitude of the gravitational pull also decreases. eventually, the gravitational pull with be near zero while the velocity is still above zero. it may be possible to have "mini" big crunches, but most of the matter in the universe most likely won't condense into one spot.

i have a question: i read that the universe is accelerating away from the "center". so do they mean for just the component of velocity with a positive value pointing away from the center, or do they use the word "acceleration" because matter is constantly rotating and revolving?

 

[Cubemario]

Sorry folks, I had to do it.

Now That's a BIG crunch.

 

[espio87]

Sorry folks, I had to do it.

Now That's a BIG crunch.

hmmmmmmmm...
too bad I'm wearing brackets

 

[CivicSmash]

yes it does. again, think of asymptotes. as the universe expands, matter separates. the velocity relative to the center of mass decreases, but the magnitude of the gravitational pull also decreases. eventually, the gravitational pull with be near zero while the velocity is still above zero. it may be possible to have "mini" big crunches, but most of the matter in the universe most likely won't condense into one spot.

i have a question: i read that the universe is accelerating away from the "center". so do they mean for just the component of velocity with a positive value pointing away from the center, or do they use the word "acceleration" because matter is constantly rotating and revolving?

Your logic makes no sense. All you doing is using big words.

 

[espio87]

Your logic makes no sense. All you doing is using big words.

The debate of the ultimate fate of the universe is still going on. The Big Crunch is just one of the possibilities. Appart from it we have other theories like the Big Rip, the Big Freeze and the Big Bounce (the theory which I support).
Of course, the fate of the universe is uncertain, we need to witness it so we know what will happen, and since that's currently technologically impossible we won't be able to find out.

 

[AltF4]

CivicSmash:

Wow... I mean just wow. You almost make it sound like you know what you're talking about. Almost. So congratulations on that, I guess.

I don't know where you like to think you get your information, but the eventual fate of the universe USED to be uncertain. Just do a google for "redshift galaxy" or something similar. The universe is not just expanding, but accelerating. It will never come back together for a big crunch as once postulated.

Also, the big crunch did not necessarily happen, I can't imagine why you would assert that it did. And it's nonsense to even think that it did because no information can be passed through the singularity. But I guess you already knew that because you're so well versed in information theory and quantum mechanics. Oh? You're not? Then go away, and don't insult me.

Go look up Hawking's "No Boundary" theory, it is a currently popular account of how the universe can exist without ever being created. Thus no previous universes before it. I don't know where you get your information. Probably a healthy mix between listening to PBS science shows from the 70's and making **** up.

 

[Aesir]

Civic you're arguing with Bill Nye DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE **** THAT MEANS?!?

 

[CivicSmash]

CivicSmash:

Wow... I mean just wow. You almost make it sound like you know what you're talking about. Almost. So congratulations on that, I guess.

I don't know where you like to think you get your information, but the eventual fate of the universe USED to be uncertain. Just do a google for "redshift galaxy" or something similar. The universe is not just expanding, but accelerating. It will never come back together for a big crunch as once postulated.

Also, the big crunch did not necessarily happen, I can't imagine why you would assert that it did. And it's nonsense to even think that it did because no information can be passed through the singularity. But I guess you already knew that because you're so well versed in information theory and quantum mechanics. Oh? You're not? Then go away, and don't insult me.

Go look up Hawking's "No Boundary" theory, it is a currently popular account of how the universe can exist without ever being created. Thus no previous universes before it. I don't know where you get your information. Probably a healthy mix between listening to PBS science shows from the 70's and making **** up.

stephen hawkings theory is just one possiblity. Probably way less believed than the big bang theory among scientists.

From Wikipedia the Free Encyclopedia:
"If the gravitational attraction of all the matter within the observable horizon is high enough, the expansion of the universe eventually reverses. In the absence of a cosmological constant, this happens when the matter density exceeds the critical density. Because entropy continues to increase in the contracting phase, the contraction looks very different from the time reversal of the expansion. While the early universe was highly uniform, a contracting universe would become increasingly clumped. Eventually all matter would coalesce into black holes, which would then coalesce with each other; THE UNIFIED BLACK HOLE singularity IS the BIG CRUNCH SINGULARITY.. (The big bang singularity, in contrast, does not resemble a black hole or white hole singularity.)"


"Recent experimental evidence (namely the observation of distant supernovae as standard candles, and the well-resolved mapping of the cosmic microwave background) have shown that the expansion of the universe is not being slowed down by gravity but rather accelerating. However, since the nature of the DARK ENERGY that DRIVES the acceleration is UNKNOWN, it is still possible that it might eventually reverse sign and cause a rapid collapse."[1]

The energy expanding the universe is limited, like i was saying earlier. How can an energy source be infinite? Thats like saying your car is infinitely full of gas.

Oh i did look up Redshift.
From Wikipedia the free encyclopedia:
"Extragalactic observations:
The most distant objects exhibit larger redshifts corresponding to the Hubble flow of the universe. The largest observed redshift, corresponding to the greatest distance and furthest back in time, is that of the cosmic microwave background radiation; the numerical value of its redshift is about z = 1089 (z = 0 corresponds to present time), and it shows the state of the Universe about 13.7 billion years ago, and 379,000 years after the initial moments of the Big Bang."


The bing bang is a FACT.

BOO-YAH

 

[AltF4]

Boo yah?

Boo yah that you looked a bunch of stuff up on wikipedia and copied and pasted it? I could probably train a chimp to do that. But you did successfully demonstrate that you had no idea what you were talking about.

You started off with "there definately WAS a big crunch, and that I should read a book because I'm so stupid, lol" and after a meager amount of wikipedia search your tale has changed to "well, it's POSSIBLE there was a big crunch."

No fricking duh. I said it was possible. Possible, but ultimately irrelevant due to information loss. But you still don't know what I'm talking about because you don't even know what that means. Maybe you can find it on wikipedia like everything else so far.

Or maybe you can stop trying to state as fact things that are both erroneous and over your head.

 

[CivicSmash]

Boo yah?

Boo yah that you looked a bunch of stuff up on wikipedia and copied and pasted it? I could probably train a chimp to do that. But you did successfully demonstrate that you had no idea what you were talking about.

You started off with "there definately WAS a big crunch, and that I should read a book because I'm so stupid, lol" and after a meager amount of wikipedia search your tale has changed to "well, it's POSSIBLE there was a big crunch."

No fricking duh. I said it was possible. Possible, but ultimately irrelevant due to information loss. But you still don't know what I'm talking about because you don't even know what that means. Maybe you can find it on wikipedia like everything else so far.

Or maybe you can stop trying to state as fact things that are both erroneous and over your head.

Ive been saying that there was a big crunch the entire time. Your just mad because you know me and wikipedia are right.

 

[AltF4]

... and apparently you don't know how to read English sentences either. This has got to be a troll, and I'm not gonna feed'm any more. That's the only explanation.

Man, why do I always come back to this thread. I know better than to use logic in the pool room.

 

[CivicSmash]

Quote:
Originally Posted by espio87:
"All the matter in the previous universe condensed in one single spot thanks to a phenomenon called the Big Crunch."

AltF4Warrior reply:

"There is absolutely no basis for this statement."

Originally posted by espio87:
"Also, scientific research shows that a Big Crunch will happen in the universe. So I guess then a Big Bang will happen again and another universe will be created."

Reply by AltF4Warrior:

"Completely wrong again. In fact, it is quite the opposite. It is well known that galaxies are accelerating away from each other, and will never again meet in a big crunch."

Originally posted by AltF4Warrior:
"No fricking duh. I said it was possible."


Yeah you sure did.....NOT

 

[AltF4]

*takes a deep breath and counts to ten*

You know that we were talking about two completely different events? One is a (possible) big crunch in the past. But there is no evidence of such a crunch and in fact it is impossible for there to be any. I fail to see how you have any reason to claim victory in this matter, but you have anyway.

The second event is a (potential) big crunch that will happen in the future. This one is at least worth speculation. There is no indication that a big crunch will occur, and is indescribably more likely that it will not crunch. Hence my statement.

Again, why are you celebrating? Your original statement was:

It is also a known fact by scientists that the universe will slowly stop expanding and start to collapse back within itself. Do not say this is untrue, go read a book.

In addition to your just complete nonsense about how we "know where the center of the universe is", I can't comprehend how you are pretending as if you've ever been right about anything you've said so far. You looked up a bunch of stuff on wiki that contradicted your own statements, then misunderstood (apparently) them to think they supported you. That's impressive.

 

[Sinz]

Civic you're arguing with Bill Nye DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE **** THAT MEANS?!?

This is one of the few non Bill Nye posts I support.

Fun fact: I used to know Bill. He lived next door to my uncle in LA. I had lunch with him a couple times, really really smart guy.

Also, the possible collision of the matter in the future is possible.

 

[KingJiggyWiggy]

What the **** no one here has a life. I come back with 3 added pages!

I think its clear that none of you know what antinomianism is. Hypocrites are always ruining your image of Christ, even if the actual religion isn't present.

Some of you said that Caesar existed because of history but that is all it is: history.

To anyone who isn't well versed in history that would work, but you really picked the wrong person to argue history against...>_>

I'm just going to list a few reasons;

1. We have Primary sources of his existence.

2. We have secondary sources of his existence

ffs we even have things he wrote himself, we even have his political adversaries talking about him

Jesus has primary and secondary resources. I used this same argument, the only differences are the ***holes who writing history and evidence. I wouldn't be surprised if you guys trusted a scientist, or any other proclaimed "intelligent" person, without even giving it a second thought. To close this, do you guys believe the lie that SUVs are safe or that asthma is an incurable disease?

.Please never have a science check again, because you really dont know what you are talking about at al

Please. Everyone here doesn't know what they are talking about because we aren't well known geniuses. But your always right and no one else is.

.....

Remember guys, seeing isn't always believing. I recently saw an old nightline debate over the existence of God. I wish they would have gotten better representatives but I like what Ray said in the closing statement.

Imagine if a man from a hundred years ago transports into your living room. He stands in this corner saying, "What is this box?," and I say, "Well thats a television set." He taps on it saying, "What does it do?" A man appears reading the up to date news. The guy says, "How did that man get into the box?" "He's not in the box." The guys says, "Is he in the box, or isn't he?" I say, "Well, his image is in the box. A signal, a television signal, is sent through the air and gets to my house where there is a disk, a satellite dish, and comes through a cable and then to the set. Then it manifests." The guys taps on the screen and says, "What are you talking about? Your saying that some invisible news reader goes through the air, floats here invisibly, gets to a dish on your, goes through the cable and appears in the set? What are you talking about!? You think I'm a fool!?" There is an air of confidence in his voice and I show him the remote to push the power switch to see it happening. And I know what we're saying sounds fantastic in the truest sense of the word. We're saying that the invisible God will manifest himself to you if you push the button. Thats all you have to do. Theres a challenge for you, push the button. Its called repentance and faith, be honest, realize that you have sinned against God, read the commandments, understand that there is provision in God to have everlasting life. Push the button and repent in all you. Put your trust in the savior.

And no one even answered my question: What is the major religion/philosophy of Europe, and why are church's being paid to say the wrong thing to audiences for the sake or removing religion completely?

 

[Igneous42]

IF there is no religion there are no morals. There is no such thing as right and wrong, it's all created in your mind. If thats so then ignore your conscience because it's nothing more then a feeling created by your brain.

So do what feels good, regardless of how it effects other people. What makes **** wrong if there is no such thing as sin?

 

[Aesir]

JigglyWiggly before I start, I think you're ignoring things because you just want to believe your opinions are true rather then thinking,"well maybe this dude has something here...>_>

your recent reply to me is just sad really, it's like you're claiming written history is a conspiracy if you don't agree with it.

Jesus has primary and secondary resources.

Name them.

Bible doesn't count.

I used this same argument, the only differences are the ***holes who writing history and evidence.

Such a bull**** argument. History is about looking at all the evidence not picking and choosing.

I wouldn't be surprised if you guys trusted a scientist, or any other proclaimed "intelligent" person, without even giving it a second thought.

If he can provide creditable sources to support his opinion yeah I'll trust him until proven otherwise. I don't have a biased toward certain opinions.

To close this, do you guys believe the lie that SUVs are safe or that asthma is an incurable disease?

There are worse cars then SUV's

Asthma isn't curable, it's treatable to the point where it can be controlled but you can't reverse it and never come down with it again.

and no I'm not making this up, comes from my mom and sister, both RT's.

Some of you said that Caesar existed because of history but that is all it is: history.

Because with history we can see what happened back in those days...>_>

 

[GhostAnime]

omg, the page grew 3 pages over a day!

i will now judge your lives!

also, can we please stop trying to prove god through worthless stories? if you have a point, explain it. not "here's a story of the 3 pigs who believed in jesus."

So do what feels good, regardless of how it effects other people. What makes **** wrong if there is no such thing as sin?

hey, buddy, did ya hear? right and wrong are made up.

 

[Jellybelly]

So do what feels good, regardless of how it effects other people. What makes **** wrong if there is no such thing as sin?

That is a terrible, stupid argument.

Theres a word called sin, and a word called crime.

Sin is word invented by christians to condemn acts of "evil." If you commit a sin then you'll go to hell.

Crime is a word invented by a legal system of government which is there to prosecute those who wrong others and create injustice. If you commit a crime (a serious one anyway) you'll go to prison.

Sin and crime are not the same thing. Of course **** is wrong, what a terrible example. Even if god does or doesn't exist nothing makes something like **** condonable.

 

[Circus]

*decides to jump into an easy argument and leave the big stuff to the big kids*

IF there is no religion there are no morals. There is no such thing as right and wrong, it's all created in your mind. If thats so then ignore your conscience because it's nothing more then a feeling created by your brain.

So do what feels good, regardless of how it effects other people. What makes **** wrong if there is no such thing as sin?

You seem to be under the impression that because there isn't an obvious answer to how we come to common conclusions of what right and wrong are, that they must be implanted in all of us by God. Or at least a god. That's not necessarily true. I see no reason why we, as human beings, can't simply have the sense of our own to know hurting people is wrong and helping them is right. Hurting people makes them feel bad; helping them makes them feel good (or at least less bad). As you can see by my wording it's a pretty simple, almost childish concept.

In general, I find the "it's unexplainable so it MUST be God" idea to be completely absurd. I think even most religious people would and should concede that. Even if you have an unshakable belief in a religion, I think that any half-way intelligent person would admit that God isn't just the automatic answer because it must be. It's the answer simply because that's what you've come to believe based on the information given to you. Ultimately, it comes back to religion being a belief, not a fact. Having principles doesn't automatically change that.

 

[Cubemario]

"Imagine if a man from a hundred years ago transports into your living room. He stands in this corner saying, "What is this box?," and I say, "Well thats a television set." He taps on it saying, "What does it do?" A man appears reading the up to date news. The guy says, "How did that man get into the box?" "He's not in the box." The guys says, "Is he in the box, or isn't he?" I say, "Well, his image is in the box. A signal, a television signal, is sent through the air and gets to my house where there is a disk, a satellite dish, and comes through a cable and then to the set. Then it manifests." The guys taps on the screen and says, "What are you talking about? Your saying that some invisible news reader goes through the air, floats here invisibly, gets to a dish on your, goes through the cable and appears in the set? What are you talking about!? You think I'm a fool!?" There is an air of confidence in his voice and I show him the remote to push the power switch to see it happening. And I know what we're saying sounds fantastic in the truest sense of the word. We're saying that the invisible God will manifest himself to you if you push the button. Thats all you have to do. Theres a challenge for you, push the button. Its called repentance and faith, be honest, realize that you have sinned against God, read the commandments, understand that there is provision in God to have everlasting life. Push the button and repent in all you. Put your trust in the savior."

Oh my, this is absolutely brilliant, couldn't have put it better myself. This is so full of win it's not even funny. Too bad it'll be ignored by everyone in this topic and people will go on and argue about nothing until their blue in the face.

 

[Jellybelly]

Oh my, this is absolutely brilliant, couldn't have put it better myself. This is so full of win it's not even funny. Too bad it'll be ignored by everyone in this topic and people will go on and argue about nothing until their blue in the face.

I read it, but it doesn't change a thing about how I feel.

 

[Gamer4Fire]

IF there is no religion there are no morals. There is no such thing as right and wrong, it's all created in your mind. If thats so then ignore your conscience because it's nothing more then a feeling created by your brain.

So do what feels good, regardless of how it effects other people. What makes **** wrong if there is no such thing as sin?

Then how do you explain the morality of all those people (most of the world) who have never heard of jesus? Proof that you don't need to be xtian to do good.

Oh my, this is absolutely brilliant, couldn't have put it better myself. This is so full of win it's not even funny. Too bad it'll be ignored by everyone in this topic and people will go on and argue about nothing until their blue in the face.

A major difference between your tripe and the actual path of win is that I can show someone how cable television or satellite works. Not only can I show this, I can prove it. I can take apart a tv and show the inner workings and explain each piece. I can drive someone down to a television studio and show them how a newscast is made. But when we ask you to show how any of your idiotic ramblings work you hem and haw, pretend not to hear or make stuff up. You had diverted from the path of win a long time ago. You continue to fail.

 

[Cubemario]

I can do the same thing with christianity and I have and i've done no hem or hawing, i've made it pretty clear. Both sides make stuff up and pretend not to hear, unfortunately a lot of people make stuff up, but I do no such thing, and i've heard, and it still doesn't change my faith because I have actually genuinely tried and explored christianity and I have seen the proof and results for myself.

As it says...

"Theres a challenge for you, push the button. Its called repentance and faith, be honest, realize that you have sinned against God, read the commandments, understand that there is provision in God to have everlasting life. Push the button and repent in all you. Put your trust in the savior.""

Which is something you clearly aren't going to do. Don't knock it if you know nothing about the journey and haven't experienced it for yourself. In other words, don't criticize, mock, and insult something you know nothing about, it just shows you as a troll and a flamer which is exactly what your doing.

 

[Osco316]

Have you tried any other religion? Have you taken the journey of embracing Islam/Hinduism/Judaism or any other faith?

 

[Eor]

Cubemario, everything you have said recently is based around the idea that prayer has results. There are no results. This is from an ex-Christian and someone who wants to believe in a religion. Prayer does nothing.

 

[Gamer4Fire]

I can do the same thing with christianity and I have and i've done no hem or hawing, i've made it pretty clear. Both sides make stuff up and pretend not to hear, unfortunately a lot of people make stuff up, but I do no such thing, and i've heard, and it still doesn't change my faith because I have actually genuinely tried and explored christianity and I have seen the proof and results for myself.

As it says...

"Theres a challenge for you, push the button. Its called repentance and faith, be honest, realize that you have sinned against God, read the commandments, understand that there is provision in God to have everlasting life. Push the button and repent in all you. Put your trust in the savior.""

Which is something you clearly aren't going to do. Don't knock it if you know nothing about the journey and haven't experienced it for yourself. In other words, don't criticize, mock, and insult something you know nothing about, it just shows you as a troll and a flamer which is exactly what your doing.

No, I do not need to try your religion. I've already found a religion that does good for me, and it doesn't require belief in an invisible sky daddy or any other unprovable caveats. I don't need to make stuff up to show how science works and how christianity doesn't. I have cold hard facts.

All double-blind sociological studies on prayer have shown no statistical benefit for being prayed for. The only time it helps is if a person believes they are being prayed for, whether they are or not. This is proof enough to me that prayer does not work.

The make up of the Earth shows it to be about four and a half billion years old, not six thousand. Everything from trees that predate six thousand years, geological time dating, carbon dating and the fossil records show us that the Earth could not be only six thousand years old. And all those time measurements agree with each other. This is enough evidence to believe that the Earth is much older than six thousand and quite possibly is four and a half billion years.

The fossil records also point to the common ancestry of man and evolutionary theory. Even with the many small gaps between species, there is enough transitory evidence in the fossil records to show the evolution of man from earlier hominids. This, and all of the experiments with natural selection and evolution, lead me to think that man evolved from an ape like ancestor.

You, on the other hand, can give absolutely no evidence to support any of your assertions from the bible. You cannot prove there was a global flood, you cannot prove your brand of creation myth, you cannot prove god exists and you can't even prove that jesus existed. All the historical data disagrees with these assertions. So go shove your proselytizing self where the sun don't shine unless you can back it up with some hard evidence.

 

[Jellybelly]

QFT completely gamer4fire, I stopped believing in fairy tales a long time ago.

 

[Igneous42]

That is a terrible, stupid argument.

Theres a word called sin, and a word called crime.

Sin is word invented by christians to condemn acts of "evil." If you commit a sin then you'll go to hell.

Crime is a word invented by a legal system of government which is there to prosecute those who wrong others and create injustice. If you commit a crime (a serious one anyway) you'll go to prison.

Sin and crime are not the same thing. Of course **** is wrong, what a terrible example. Even if god does or doesn't exist nothing makes something like **** condonable.

So some government officials that I've never met is going to decide what is right and wrong for me and all of society? Law decides whats right and wrong? Sorry but I'd rather base my morals on higher power that is righteous and loving then some government.

 

[espio87]

So some government officials that I've never met is going to decide what is right and wrong for me and all of society? L

Laws weren't created in a single day. Over the course of history laws changed as well as goverments. What was once despotism slowly became a democracy. In theory laws exist to serve as a balance in society.

Law decides whats right and wrong? Sorry but I'd rather base my morals on higher power that is righteous and loving then some government.

I'm atheist but I will never swear allegiance to my goverment. If you saw what happened in the Argentinian History, you would know why. I don't base my morals on a higher power but rather on hope to restore the values people are constantly losing in this post-modern age. I know the politics in my country are a big farse, but I have hopes that the next generation will do better.
Atheist don't have faith, but they can have hope.