Question for religious people.......

[MikeofTulsa Moderator]

i still fail to see why we are even discussing this devildriver, neither of us will sway the others opinon.

 

[newusername 10+ year member]

Evolution is exactly why we need faith, because the natural way of the earth is the strong survive, without morals my special needs son would be left for dead:crap: What say you:wow:

Why are you coming back to the morals thing now instead of following up with what I said earlier? As I already just mentioned, morals are developed by what we would and would not like done to ourselves, as well as what is best for society. This is demonstrated in all walks of life on this planet, including humans.

This notion that you need religion to have morals is ridiculous...I have no religion, and yet I have morals. How could that have happened without the Bible?

 

[newusername 10+ year member]

good example. if your moral compass is based on that, than that means its perfectly acceptable to kill and or opress people based on their skin color right? why?? because to do so, with that line of this thinking, benefits society at large; it helps your friends and family.now if you look at that, even back then, not now, and your moral compass is based on a healthy and rational spiritual system u know thats wrong to do. u might even be inclined to do something about it. but when somebody says 'hey man, its fine. it helps society and protects my fam and friends", thats very off and irrational and even more so if u use the golden rule which i bolded up top.

when people based their morals on society, morals gets worse because society gets steadily worse. thats obectively true. society gets worse as time moves on. and if one where to say well that depends on what type of society u live. if we just take america for example, we live in a society that is permeated by drugs, brainless tv shows, forked up music extreme *** and many other things that are negative. and u (not u personally) think morals should grow with society when society is regressing into a state that stunts growth???

I stopped reading at the part with emphasis because society includes much more than your friends and family.

 

[BoomBoomBoy 10+ year member]

What if the crocodile had no reason to evolve, spiecies evolve to adapt to thier surroundings. Granted sorroundings have changed to the croc, but not enough to cause an evolution type change. It is a perfect water predator as it is.

That is highly speculative on your part, wouldn't you agree? Many marine reptiles went extinct 65M years ago when the supposed asteroid event occurred that caused the last mass extinction. It supposedly changed the the Earth from a reptile dominated planet to one dominated by mammals.

How can you rationally argue that making up special circustances as you have done about the crocodile (when there's zero proof) as any more believable than religion?

Doesn't it bother you that scientific explanations change from one thing to another on a regular basis with nothing other than scientific speculation?

 

[adio 5,000+ posts]

I wouldn't necessarily call that blind faith. Both are simple applications and extrapolations of basic scientific principles that function correctly day in and day out. On the other hand, religion has nothing supporting it other than a book and the faith of the people who read it.
Maybe you prefer Of Pandas and People?

u know thats wrong. most religions have evidence that support it, archeological, cultural, etc. if people just read a book and say 'WELP,thats good enough for me'. that is blind faith. no religion wants blind faith.

 

[adio 5,000+ posts]

I stopped reading at the part with emphasis because society includes much more than your friends and family.

1.)you're lyin

2. right, but thats what people were sayin in my atheist thread. thats not my view

 

[mokedaddy 5,000+ posts]

Since there some religious people in here now, I will ask this again.

Why did God wait so long to introduce Christianity to the people?

I know its opinion based, just want to hear what others think.

 

[newusername 10+ year member]

That is highly speculative on your part, wouldn't you agree? Many marine reptiles went extinct 65M years ago when the supposed asteroid event occurred that caused the last mass extinction. It supposedly changed the the Earth from a reptile dominated planet to one dominated by mammals.
How can you rationally argue that making up special circustances as you have done about the crocodile (when there's zero proof) as any more believable than religion?

Doesn't it bother you that scientific explanations change from one thing to another on a regular basis with nothing other than scientific speculation?

The difference is that you assume they must have had to change, but failed to evolve, whereas I see that they have not changed and thus they did not require evolution. I see what has happened, where you are speculating on what should have happened.

 

[newusername 10+ year member]

u know thats wrong. most religions have evidence that support it, archeological, cultural, etc. if people just read a book and say 'WELP,thats good enough for me'. that is blind faith. no religion wants blind faith.

What evidence is there? We don't even know who wrote the books in the old or new testament, much less been able to prove that anything non-ambiguous in the Bible happened.

 

[adio 5,000+ posts]

Since there some religious people in here now, I will ask this again.
Why did God wait so long to introduce Christianity to the people?

I know its opinion based, just want to hear what others think.

when did God do it?

 

[mokedaddy 5,000+ posts]

when did God do it?

Definitely not at the beginning of man, as its known today.

 

[BoomBoomBoy 10+ year member]

The difference is that you assume they must have had to change, but failed to evolve, whereas I see that they have not changed and thus they did not require evolution. I see what has happened, where you are speculating on what should have happened.

Yeah, I'm going to duck out of this circle jerk (not pointing a finger b/c these discussion always turn out this way), but do you understand the difference btwn a theory and a scientific law?

At best, a theory is an educated guess. It doesn't even have to be a good guess, just an educated one. Theories aren't facts. In most cases they can't be repeated or have no repeatability. Bottomline; just guesses.

Laws on the otherhand can be repeated. You can count on the same results everytime you conduct an experiment.

There are very few scientific laws as compared to scientific theories. And whether you realize it or not. You are a religious person. The only difference is your God is science.

 

[newusername 10+ year member]

Yeah, I'm going to duck out of this circle jerk (not pointing a finger b/c these discussion always turn out this way), but do you understand the difference btwn a theory and a scientific law?
At best, a theory is an educated guess. It doesn't even have to be a good guess, just an educated one. Theories aren't facts. In most cases they can't be repeated or have no repeatability. Bottomline; just guesses.

Laws on the otherhand can be repeated. You can count on the same results everytime you conduct an experiment.

There are very few scientific laws as compared to scientific theories. And whether you realize it or not. You are a religious person. The only difference is your God is science.

First, the religious part. By the definition of religion, no, I am not religious.

Second, you are misinterpreting what a scientific theory is. It is not just a guess or a hunch. A scientific theory must be predictive, logical, and supported by experimental evidence. If it is not any of these, the theory will be discarded in favour of the theory that better reaches these qualifications. Your religion, on the other hand, requires nothing more than faith to be considered true. Now that is what I call a guess. At the very least, it is a highly implausible theory. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif

 

[BoomBoomBoy 10+ year member]

Second, you are misinterpreting what a scientific theory is. It is not just a guess or a hunch. A scientific theory must be predictive, logical, and supported by experimental evidence.

I stand on what I said about theories. Best guess. Nothing more, nothing less.//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/cool.gif.3bcaf8f141236c00f8044d07150e34f7.gif

 

[newusername 10+ year member]

I stand on what I said about theories. Best guess. Nothing more, nothing less.//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/cool.gif.3bcaf8f141236c00f8044d07150e34f7.gif

Nothing is truly provable. However, some ideas are more believable than others (not all theories are equal), and unfortunately religious theory falls way down the list.