Something my friend in my clan posted on our forum, and i totally agree with him.........

Religion is a thing of the past. It will only remain as breaks for scientific research. It will also turn into meaningless conflicts, debates and even wars.

People will die in God's name. It's thing of the past, we can live a well working society without any religion. But I admit that religion was needed back in the day.

From 1945 and beyond, religion seemed a much less needed issue, for a simple matter, in the old days ( the Middle Ages ) the government/state were not able to control every single bit of their country, in order to make people to stay in control, they gave them something to believe in. It worked for a thousand of years.

But now technology is so advance that you can watch every single corner of a nation on your mobile ( if you wish ), and religion has become obsolete.

This is not a debate with weither or not God exists, it's a debate weather or not we need religion. Please discuss.

[ November 29, 2005: Message edited by: Poncho ]

Discuss

Religion = hope

that's why
I'm not gonna change my beliefs anyway so I don't give a shat

we dont need organized religion. but i think its good for everyone to have something they believe in. i used to be an athiest, and while i do not subscribe to any official religion. i have developed my own beliefs as to what is beyond the grave and how one should live their life.

XENU WILL SAVE YOU IF YOU REPENT NOW SINNER!

RELIGION FANBOYS

gotta love them

quote:Originally posted by dascoo
Religion is a thing of the past. It will only remain as breaks for scientific research.

Unless you mean "brakes," I have no idea what you're talking about. In fact, most of your post consists of irrelevant statements with no support...but I probably have a bias, so let's skip to the interesting bits, shall we?

quote:From 1945 and beyond, religion seemed a much less needed issue, for a simple matter, in the old days ( the Middle Ages ) the government/state were not able to control every single bit of their country, in order to make people to stay in control, they gave them something to believe in. It worked for a thousand of years.

Last time I checked, religion tended to control government, not the other way around. The only example of the government using religion was when the Church of England was created, but that wasn't to control the people, it was to become separate from Catholicism and, consequently, the Pope.

quote:But now technology is so advance that you can watch every single corner of a nation on your mobile ( if you wish ), and religion has become obsolete.

That's simply not true, although you may be speaking in a much broader sense than I am. Regardless, religion wasn't ever intended as a tool for the government to control a population, at least not in most normal cases.


But let's get to the discussion bit: is religion necessary? Strictly speaking, no. What could possibly be the necessity of a system of beliefs centered on the supernatural? Therefore, it isn't just obsolete, it was never even needed in the first place.

On to a more relevant question: is religion in any way beneficial and, if so, does its benefits outweigh its costs? Well, that depends on the situation. Judaism, for instance, has many benefits -- because it demands literacy, debate and argumentative skills, and the ability to concentrate on and analyze complex and ideas, Jews have a tendency to excel at academic, medicinal, judicial, and entertainment institutions. However, they also have to deal with others' inability to accept them into society which leads them to be persecuted and murdered en masse. But then again, due to that persecution, Jews have an extreme sense of family and connection to other Jews around the world. The issue of pros and cons becomes very cloudy when you really look into it. It becomes even more difficult to decipher when you consider that the costs are only a result of external society. Judaism itself is not to blame (historically speaking). If people were more tolerant, the only tangible cost of Judaism would be a lack of mechanical skills.

Keep in mind that I only use Judaism as an example because it's the religion that I'm most familiar with, but I can say with certainty that there isn't a religion out there without its own set of costs and benefits.

eh im an open minded athiest so ,beleive in whatever the hell you want

UNDEROATH!!
<3

At the end we will see if we need one :P

HAHAHHAHAHAHHAHA

WE NEED COASTER MAN, so he can laugh

long live teh lounge

Religion is the basis to almost all moral belief's and moral limitations. You may not like it, but its true either way. Its simply ignorant to ignore how big a role religion plays in society.

Im a athiest btw.

I think religion should be a bit more simpler, maybe so people don't get annoyed with all of the rituals there are, I don't know. If you want it, keep it.

I tend to have a fairly low opinion of religion, particularly in the large, organized sense of it. It seems a bit ridiculus that such a large number of people could belive in one strict (and often irrelevent) set of values, much less join together towards any common goal. There's far too much gray area that needs to be filled in by the individual.
As the Subhumans say, religion is "the fear of the threat of something unreal."

here it goes... religion is not effected by technology thank God.... if it was we would be worshiping nerds and their 1337 computers... anyway religion shouldn't taken in the context of the people that killed int he name of their god, because those people are fanatics. Though someone that claims to be religious will most likely be persecuted it gives hope it has to me, its because of religion that I haven't blown my brains out yet. You can quote me on this one. Even if my religion is false and I end up in hell or end up just rotting in the earth with no afterlife, it gave me the strength to keep on living and it gave me hope for tomorrow and I will never give up my religion for any technological marvel or some research be some top scientist saying there was no God or anything like that. To be honest religion is personal and really doesn't need to be put up for public debate. By the way, I have heard plenty of stories from people saying how their religion gives them the will to live and how its helped them quit drug addictions and its given them peace of mind with state that their life is in whether it be in debt, flat broke, or going through personal tragedy. thats just my 2 cents, most everyone knows where I stand on religion I think though...

quote:Originally posted by ?To be honest religion is personal and really doesn't need to be put up for public debate.
Exactly. For example, Christianity isn't just going to some schmassive church, it's about having a personal relationship with God, whether you go to some big building or not.

There's my half-cent.

i know where chakra stands on religion. :P

and i concur with maxx's concurring with t

You do?

I don't wanna touch this topic with a 20ft barret.

im not goin to say much, but i will no matter what you say, human nature demands the belief of something larger then it, and thus youll never get rigd of religion

Organized religion isn't necessary, but religion in some form exists almost everywhere. I consider myself a casual Buddhist, because I choose to follow many of the practices of Buddha, but do I really need Buddhism in my life? Does anybody really need a strict religion? Not really, but most people who arereligious choose their religion becuase it closest resembles their own moral codes.

Even through all of this, I kind of thought that religion was created to answer questions...
Where did we really come from? Sure, we can find a whole lots more about where we came from now (thanks to technology, but only to an extent), but what of others asking this this question 1000 years ago?

We may have evolved from monkeys, but who made the monkeys?

Right you are!
In a sense, some might agree that religion are the supports for your house of spirituality. Although you may not be into religion all that much, you could be a firm believer in alot of things, but I'd say the best would be yourself. Religion, in my view is very much like that charming pirate stud, Captain Ben said. Pretty much, religion is answers. Your sense of spirituality could be in religion, sports, your school (:S) or even in someone you could consider your hero (Although, having a hero is a way of making yourself feel inferior [By acknowledging that your 'hero' is perfect or close to it...].).

Buy hey, it all cracks down to what you believe.

quote:Originally posted by vash763
WE NEED COASTER MAN, so he can laugh


:D

quote:Originally posted by Captain BenEven through all of this, I kind of thought that religion was created to answer questions...
Where did we really come from? Sure, we can find a whole lots more about where we came from now (thanks to technology, but only to an extent), but what of others asking this this question 1000 years ago?

We may have evolved from monkeys, but who made the monkeys?
Supposedly, the big bang, which supposedly also happened randomly. Or is that another theory?

The monkeys supposedly came from these little blobs that slowly "evolved". There are so many screw-ups in the "evolutionary chain" to the point of ridiculousity, thus, it is ridiculous, in a bad way.

quote:Originally posted by MaxxThere are so many screw-ups in the "evolutionary chain" to the point of ridiculousity, thus, it is ridiculous, in a bad way.


Oh?

Evolutionists themselves have admitted it, Vij. Thus, it is apparently true whether you like it or not.



VV POSSIBLY IRRELAVENT VV

Evolution takes faith to believe in, and so does Christianity, and all the other religions out there.

Silly Maxx, that wasn't doubt, I just had no idea what you were talking about. I still don't. Explain what these "screw-ups" are.

god/gods/whatever your religion respects exists. but don't think about him/her/the,, or you'll go nuts, because too many questions are there..

besides, without religion, how can we say OMG?

Oh My STAN would be an appropriate replacement. The mighty STAN would be pleased. OMS, here he comes.

You need to narrow down the question. Is religion necessary... for what? To continue populating the earth? To properly educate ourselves? To live in an organized society? I mean, technically there's no way we can disagree with you. When people ask 'is that really necessary?', they generally mean, 'could you live without it?'. People don't just up and die as a result of lacking religion in their life.

quote:Originally posted by VijchtidoodahSilly Maxx, that wasn't doubt, I just had no idea what you were talking about. I still don't. Explain what these "screw-ups" are.
A good example is the horses. As the horse supposedly "evolved", it got bigger(duh), but the number of ribs it had didn't; it randomly skipped around, because the horse didn't evolve; it's just a bunch of similar looking animals.

quote:Originally posted by Maxxquote:Originally posted by Captain BenEven through all of this, I kind of thought that religion was created to answer questions...
Where did we really come from? Sure, we can find a whole lots more about where we came from now (thanks to technology, but only to an extent), but what of others asking this this question 1000 years ago?

We may have evolved from monkeys, but who made the monkeys?
Supposedly, the big bang, which supposedly also happened randomly. Or is that another theory?

The monkeys supposedly came from these little blobs that slowly "evolved". There are so many screw-ups in the "evolutionary chain" to the point of ridiculousity, thus, it is ridiculous, in a bad way.


There are no screw ups in evolution... Evolution itself has no purpose or direction.

True. We could have had three legs or whatever if something happened a long time ago... :O

I'm getting confused.....whatever

Don't know if yall are willing to touch on this but evolution is still a theory, so is creation, personally I do see some downfalls with carbon dating things, and the stupid reasons why the dinasours died out, if you think about it fossils are made if the corpse is quickly covered with materials, if the flood happened(which I beleive it did) it would have helped alot of corpses to be fossilized, all the plants and dirt floating in the water would help to cover some of the corpses rapidly thus starting the fossiling process. Just my uneducated opinion though.

quote:Originally posted by ?Don't know if yall are willing to touch on this but evolution is still a theory, so is creation, personally I do see some downfalls with carbon dating things, and the stupid reasons why the dinasours died out, if you think about it fossils are made if the corpse is quickly covered with materials, if the flood happened(which I beleive it did) it would have helped alot of corpses to be fossilized, all the plants and dirt floating in the water would help to cover some of the corpses rapidly thus starting the fossiling process. Just my uneducated opinion though.


A scientific theory yes... which is basically a fact. It can only be disproven, which noone has yet to do. Gravity is a theory as well :P

If you're talking about extinction and fossils, we have a pretty clear idea of just what killed the dinosaurs. There's layer of ash present in stratographic sequences around the world which is high in an element rare on earth, but more common in space, and which is believed to have been derived from a meteorite impact in the Guld of Mexico near the Yucatan Penn. How is it a stupid reason if these findings are present and consistant all over the world? We've even recreated small scale impact experiements which result in the same types of glass which form as a direct result of high pressures and high temperatures created by impact, and these types of glass are at the impact area in question. Of all the respons for extinction I've heard, that is definately the most sound.

As far as carbon dating goes, it's a good method yet it admittedly has its flaws, as do many other types of dating. Argon dating, for example, can be tainted or ruined if an input of elements younger than the thing being dated occurs. Also, carbon dating is only good to a certain number of years before samples are just unusable...not sure on the exact date. Yet with all the drawbacks I still feel their use and presence is pretty invaluble in giving us insight into just happened tens of thousands of years ago.

I've heard a few arguements for creationism as opposed to evolutionism, and what I've read seemed picked from speculation and data that was simply not correct. Looking back through some of my links I can't find the page, so please don't try to call me out on specifics here. What few arguements I do remember in part were focused on errors in Argon dating methods which supposedly made the age of the earth in the thousands of years, a geological impossibility when you look at the processes that are actually going on here. Another arguement focused on the existence of a certain plant, and claimed that it was the oldest record of plant material in the fossil record and that it only existed a few thousand years ago with nothing older than it ever found. This is just nonsense, seeing as how we've found plant and animal samples preserved from well over 100 million years ago. And when one looks at similarities between ancient plant samples and some of those from the present day, I for one find a further proof for evolution over time and not creationism. I'm not a biologist either, but there has been study after study regarding the subtle differences betwen species in close parts of the world, if only separated by small bodies of water.

Here's a good little page that talks about some of the pseudoscience behind creatiomism and some of its proofs: http://www.creationtheory.org/YoungEarth/Hartman-5.shtml

Yet I'm still off topic here, simply responding to posts above mine. Do we need religion? Certainly, some of us do. And as has already been stated, technology does not somehow make religion null and void when you gain the ability to watch any given corner of the nation. Do you realize that when you mention the Middle Ages, you're talking about a period of time in which religion and the church controlled almost every aspect of daily life in nations and people alike? That's far more than mere pacification of the masses my friend. The church was a powerhouse for many centuries, often moreso than any one nation if I remember correctly.

Now, you mention that religion is nothing but a hinderence to scneitific breakthroughs and will only lead to wars and trouble. I tell you that religion and science have nothing to do with one another, and that the wars of modern day have moved past a war of religion to a war of culture. With this large, connected world the issue is no longer focused on religious beliefs, but rather cultural ones. When was the last religious war you can think of? And please...no Jihads mentioned, for ongoing conflict between the US and other major countries in the Middle East was not started because of religious issues. I have little proof to back up my claims but observation, but then again you have no proof either.

Do we need religion? Surely we do, at least some of us do. It creates a source of hope, of something greater than ourselves, of a being willing to go the extra mile in the name of all things good. These things seem to be few and far between these days, and in an increasingly cold and sterile world of computers and technologies such things are a bit more necessary imo. Personally, I don't practice religion, and I don't believe in most organized religions. Any spiritual connection to be made can be made on ones own if it's truely meant to happen, and it certainly won't be made by paying a fee and sitting in a big room with a bunch of strangers. Yet if we did not have religion we would have missed out on some of the greatest artistic creations ever created. What about the Sistine Chapel? Many of Michelangelos greatest works? The Renaissance? A highpoint in humanity tied forever to religion which very well may not have happened if we truely didn't need religion. And where would we be without the Renaissance? I shudder to think, seeing as how thinkers back in the day gave us the basis for many of our modern sciences. Would things have been the same without religion? I can't say, but speculation says probably not.

In short, some of need it, and to those who need it the reasons are not always clear. Things spiritual are never so clearly defined. Some don't need it, at least for the time being, but things may change. Uncertainty abounds in either case, yet I'd rather have a world with religion than one without.

Thx geoligist :D

monkeys evolved from smaller primates which evolved from rodent like mammals which evolved from reptile things, which evolved from fish, which evolved from multiple celled organisms which evolved from cingle cell organisms which came from a chemical reaction......i think

w00t! Go geologist! :D

quote:Originally posted by MaxxA good example is the horses. As the horse supposedly "evolved", it got bigger(duh), but the number of ribs it had didn't; it randomly skipped around, because the horse didn't evolve; it's just a bunch of similar looking animals.


If I understand correctly, you're saying that it would be best suited with a certain number of ribs, but somehow it didn't either grow more or less to suit that need. That's not a good example, really; that's evolution. Perhaps it'll take more time to evolve that extra rib, or perhaps it isn't actually necessary at all. In any case, that horse is built to be as suitable to its environment as it possibly can be -- that's not a screw-up.

quote:Originally posted by ?Don't know if yall are willing to touch on this but evolution is still a theory, so is creation, personally I do see some downfalls with carbon dating things, and the stupid reasons why the dinasours died out, if you think about it fossils are made if the corpse is quickly covered with materials, if the flood happened(which I beleive it did) it would have helped alot of corpses to be fossilized, all the plants and dirt floating in the water would help to cover some of the corpses rapidly thus starting the fossiling process. Just my uneducated opinion though.


It's not likely that a flood would be able to continuously kill land animals all over the world over millions of years for the specific reason that land animals, as a rule, have a tough time surviving in aqueous environments. :)

However, there is proof that a major flood may have occured in the Middle East at about the same time and place that the precursor to the bible was being created.


By the way Geologist, you need to begin leaving some gaps in your logic so that I can argue with you. It's no fun otherwise.

one day, in the Garden of Eden, Adam calls out to God, "Lord, I have a problem."



"What is thy problem, Adam?" God asks.



"Lord, I know thou created me and hast provided for me and surrounded me with yon beautiful garden and all of these wonderful animals, but I am just not happy."
"Why is that, Adam?" comes the reply from the heavens.
"Lord, I am lonely."
"Well Adam, in that case, I have the perfect solution. I shall create a
'woman' for thee."
"What manner of creature is a 'woman,' Lord?"
"This 'woman' will be the most intelligent, sensitive, caring, and beautifulcreature I have ever created. She will be so intelligent that she canfigure out what thou wantest before thou wantest it. She will be sosensitive and caring that she will know thy every mood and how to make thee happy. Her beauty will rival that of the heavens and earth. She willunquestioningly care for thy every need and desire. She will be the perfect companion for thee," replies the Creator.
"Truly, she soundeth wonderful."
"She will be, but this is going to cost thee, Adam."
"How much will this 'woman' cost me Lord?" Adam asks.
"She will cost thee thy right arm, thy right leg, an eye, and an ear."
Adam ponders this for a moment.
"What can I get for a rib?"

Evolution is fake. It's a theory made by one single man.

and he wished he could take it all back while he was on his death bed

Kaider, you don't know your history very well. Evolution (a term that was created way before Darwin) was, like any other science, the product of many scientists and philosophers. We began with creationism, then that idea was tweaked into catasrophism, followed by other theories involving a wide range of devices for speciation.

There was one idea that all naturalists began to agree on -- that animals evolve over time -- but discovering exactly how that occured was the real problem. One of the first proponents of this theory actually believed in a substance called fluida (sp?) that resides in our bodies and, as we inflict physical strain on our bodies, the fluida keeps it's position and passes on those traits to out offspring (for instance, a giraffe's neck became so long because generation after generation of horses stretched their necks to reach higher leaves).

Then came Darwin who unified the idea of evolution. He was not alone, however, as other naturalists independanly came to the same conclusions.

Even after Darwin revealed his theory to the world countless skeptics and believers have tested the theory and found no reason to doubt it. That is why we say it's a theory, because it's an observation that can never be proven, but has yet to be disproved.

So, kaider, you can see that it was never the work of one man nor can it be so easily labelled as "fake." At least, it is certainly less fake than that creative idea invented thousands of years ago by people who knew relatively nothing about the history of Earth or any of the animals that inhabited it.

quote:Originally posted by KaiderEvolution is fake. It's a theory made by one single man.


Who is that then? I think you will provide me with the wrong answer :)

Sorry I had left the topic open for awhile and that was the last post I saw :P However the modern theory of evolution was created by 2 people, its just noone talks about the other guy Alfred Wallace

quote:Originally posted by KaiderEvolution is fake. It's a theory made by one single man.
Hahahahahahahaha. And what is creationism? A theory, of course.

Mmm Darwin.

quote:Originally posted by Vijchtidoodah
There was one idea that all naturalists began to agree on -- that animals evolve over time --

(for instance, a giraffe's neck became so long because generation after generation of horses stretched their necks to reach higher leaves).



I don't like the way you worded that :P It should be populations evolve over time.. Then for your second statement I copied, the neck of the giraffe did not evolve that way.. there is another theory that described evolution like that with the exact same example of the giraffe but it has been disproven. A mutation occured in which a giraffe had a longer neck, and this feature made it easier to obtain food. This made it more likely to succeed in reproducing and so this adaptation was passed on.

Okay, well, religious issues have, in fact, cost the lives of thousands of billions of people in history. Take King Herod, the Crusades, etc. and you'll find it written all over in bright pink (so yeah everything Geo said because he's cool enough to type it up). Personally, I'm somewhat of a conservative protestant Christian, and I can say I'm fairly strong in my beliefs. Because there's no real harm in religion if you learn to accept others' differences.

quote:Originally posted by Cookie.
I don't like the way you worded that :P It should be populations evolve over time..

Eh, depends on how you use the word. But you're right, "Populations" would have been a better word choice.


quote:Then for your second statement I copied, the neck of the giraffe did not evolve that way.. there is another theory that described evolution like that with the exact same example of the giraffe but it has been disproven. A mutation occured in which a giraffe had a longer neck, and this feature made it easier to obtain food. This made it more likely to succeed in reproducing and so this adaptation was passed on.

:) I am not ignorant enough to believe in that obviously flawed theory. That was just an example of a previous theory on evolution, just as I mentioned creationism and catastrphism, that shows the chain of ideas leading to Darwin's theory.

Evolution is a theory, because it was a hypothesis that was later tested and is now supported by scientific evidence.

Creationism is NOT a theory. It's a silly old way of explaining how we came to be before the modern scientific method was developed. A theory is an idea supported by evidence, there is not a single thread of evidence supporting creationism, wake up.

I mean, it's silly when you think about it, religious people only argue with science when it conflicts with their beliefs.

If you don't believe in evolution, you might as well just say that every branch of science and all of its discoveries are just rubbish, because they all came to be discovered and proven through the same methods.

"Creationism is NOT a theory."

Creationism is a theory. Just not a scientific one.

quote:Originally posted by ?You can quote me on this one.

@kaider and *poof* your there therypeople

so this is how some peopl think humans were created?
[IMAGE]
wtf?
thats not logical imo(i don't care what anyones religion is btw)

lol! <3 semagae

Heh, Yet once again this topic has fallen into disgusting argumentative tactics.

Heres one of my posts which I saved because I have had to use it oh so often. Please read. Im not however going to get involved with this argument/discussion because I dont have time to devote to this thread. Other things in this thread I have noticed which usually arise in this argument is taking words out of context, major exaggerations and I have a pretty good feeling the personal insults will make themselves present relatively soon.

The post:

Just because you prove your opponents point as being wrong, does not automatically make your point right. Try to support your point more than attacking the others points. If attacking the others point supports your point, it is fine. But in many cases, disproving the opponents points will not validate yours.
Examples: This is commonplace in the evolutionism vs creationism argument. Evolutionists will constantly try to prove god wrong, while creationists will try to prove the theory of evolution as being wrong. However if a creationist proves the theory of evolution to be wrong, it does not make his theory right, and vice versa.

Conclusion: Like this thread, most Evolutionist versus Creationist debates will end up being an argument about Whos theory is WRONG, not whos theory is RIGHT.

"However if a creationist proves the theory of evolution to be wrong"

They can't prove it wrong its a scientific theory >:P

no no NO... adam and eve came in a saucer. we are really evoluting from some rare space gremlins

quote:Originally posted by PoopHeh, Yet once again this topic has fallen into disgusting argumentative tactics.

Cheer up. It was actually beginning to turn into a healthy (albeit one-sided) debate...barring the occasional cry for attention from some of our less loved forum members.

Why are such tactics disgusting? I think they're perfectly valid, seeing as an arguement proven wrong cannot be the correct or right one. Albeit I'm no biologist or evolutionary buff, but there are a few studies to offer up in favor of evolution indeed being the right of the two theories. Besides, the topic was about our need for religion, even if the focus did slip.

Do we need religion?

We certainly do. Religion is the thing that lays down the basic morale and ethics of humanity. Without that we'd be little more than inferior animals drooling and lying in our own filth. It also helps calm one's mind in questions referring to the origins of our universe, which we obviously cannot precisely describe now, nor in the near future, simply because our world is huge beyond comprehension, and it is worked by reactions and natural forces so complicated, that although we can describe them, we cannot prove them ( i.e.: gravity ).

If we didn't have these ethical codes that come from religion ( be it any religion you can name ), our existance would loose it's point: everyone would either live for themselfes, or would come to the realisation that the end is unevitable, and before the final hour one faces countless hours of unevitable suffering, and seek the quickest-way-out, either by living in a destructive way ( which would consequently cause other people to suffer too ), or commiting suicide ( Suicide is the ultimate act of ending one's hopeless suffering ).

Note about Creationism: Everything in the Bible is metaphoric. The world wasn't created in 6 days, that's just a symbol. Interesting however, how the sages who wrote Genesis hit a bullseye with the order of things created. During canonisation, many scrolls were locked away, because they were found unfitting by the Holy Roman Church: maybe there were writings about our origin that would be much more creditable if one examines them in a scientific way, but got destroyed/locked away because back then these were thinked of as nonsense, due to the fact that they did not have the same knowladge of nature as we do.

wait wasnt the bible made waaaaaaaaaaay after jesus got killed? and wasnt it made up by a roman?

The Bible was assembled after Jesus was crucified, but the scrolls and ancient books of the Oldtestament were written earlier than the birth of the Roman Empire itself. The mentioned Genesis was written by sages during the Babilonian captivity, around 600 B.C.

Well, recent studies have proven some Biblical tales to be exaggerated or inaccurate. Take the story of Moses, for example. And King Herod died in 4 BC, which could only mean that Jesus was no born between ! BC and 1 AD. True is Demonics about the code of ethics religion preaches, and yet another example is the Biblical viewpoint on pre-marital sex and abstinence (sex is only righteous after marriage), possibly to suppress surplus poplulations during post-Christ times.

there is no real reason why we should keep on debating creation or evolution, neither can be proven really, since we really just don't know what went on back then... its all theory we are gonna all find out when we die anyway :p

quote:Originally posted by ?there is no real reason why we should keep on debating creation or evolution, neither can be proven really, since we really just don't know what went on back then... its all theory we are gonna all find out when we die anyway :p


No that is where your wrong... creation cannot be proven. Evolution on the other hand is proven.. Its a scientific theory and will remain that way until it can be disproven

beinga theory means it has not been proven, that still doesn't change that fact that there is nothing written down about the earth from about its creation unless you belive the Bible and I honestly don't think anyone is still alive from that time....

I think we need a visit to intelligent design.

quote:Originally posted by aznbl00dWell, recent studies have proven some Biblical tales to be exaggerated or inaccurate.
HOLY [CENSORED]?!?! REALLY?

quote:Originally posted by aznbl00dI think we need a visit to intelligent design.
Just creationism under another name.

im talking with clothes pins all over my face. my how they swirl about!

quote:Originally posted by aznbl00d...and yet another example is the Biblical viewpoint on pre-marital sex and abstinence (sex is only righteous after marriage), possibly to suppress surplus poplulations during post-Christ times.


It wasn't to supress surplus populations, especially since the bible tells you to spread your seed and have children. The most logical explanation would be that they wanted to ensure that any child would have a father.

who my baby daddy?

isn't this the same book where someone talks to a snake, and where someone came back from the dead, also known as re-spawning?[IMAGE]
and don't forget moving alot of water to the side...with nothing holding it back?

in my short opinion we dont need the bible, but we still needs its rules, and the morals it teaches. Its just too old.

to he who needs religion: Believe, yet do not believe you can make ME believe, and do not try to explain to other people it is good to believe. Do not tell people to believe, or why you believe, for it is merely a feeling in your heart along with the thought of believing that makes you believe.

do you really believe that?

It is not a thing to believe. It is an advice, nothing more. The only things you can believe are facts and things that are not sure. I'm just telling people what to do, and you cannot believe in that.

quote:Originally posted by Cookie.quote:Originally posted by ?there is no real reason why we should keep on debating creation or evolution, neither can be proven really, since we really just don't know what went on back then... its all theory we are gonna all find out when we die anyway :p


No that is where your wrong... creation cannot be proven. Evolution on the other hand is proven.. Its a scientific theory and will remain that way until it can be disproven


sorry for double post, but post count doesn't increase anyway so nobody will think I'm a starhunter...:
1. perhaps we will find out nothing when we die, I think it will be just like before you were born.... NOTHING
2. evolution is not proven, evolution is yet another theory that does have a lot of clues pointing in its direction.

You cannot prove there is no God, just like you cannot prove you might be in some kind of 'Matrix'. The world humans comprehend is a simple perception; an illusion created by the brain we interpret through sensory means.

Aegis for president... exactly what I thought.....
but then there will be silly believers saying "So you can't actually prove anything? Then you cannot prove that you cannot prove god exists" (Ok I'm kind of tired, so if that sentence is f'ed up, sorry...

religion os nothing more than feeling like this: omg, i would kill to get an xbox 360!
Like love, it's man made and therefor fake. This was never meant tto be. If your religious, you cheat yourself from having a truely giving life. Not that being an atheist is anyhow better at all timesa. I don'tr believe in anything, but i still feel terriblre about alot of of things.
Don't get me wrong, i think it's fne to believe in something, i just don't like ppl so comenocking on my door, asking to benefit to some cause i don't ever have or will believe n. Particularry not when these are also responsibla for stealing my state taxes:D
Anyway, i'm sorry about my bad english. I've had one drink to many..

I don't mean to be whining.

i just thought of it

you might be seeing soldat forums as a red backround, but people all your life have been telling you that its blue, so you think its blue, and when you see blood its blue, but people have been telling you its red, so you think its red. same for all the other colours, we probably see the world differently

A couple of decades ago this Nobel physics laurate gave a speech about intelligent design or something and in it he talked about why the sky was blue. He gave two theories: one, the sky is blue do to the scattering nature of light rays as told in Raleigh's wavelength theory, two, the sky is blue because God wanted it to be. Then he said what if God created Raleigh's wavelength theory to explain the color of the sky because He wanted it blue. Before the twentieth century, it was common knowledge that the sky was blue because God wanted it to be. Ahh I can't remember anymore of the speech.