HOME | DD
AmericanMuscleV8 β Something That Pisses Me Off
Published: 2008-07-01 03:29:19 +0000 UTC; Views: 6420; Favourites: 290; Downloads: 65
Redirect to original
Description
Alright, here we go with the explaination...(gonna try not to rant too much)here on DA (and a few other places) I have seen or heard comments by people of a certain belief system, that say they have their beliefs because logic supports it. ok if those are your beliefs, ok. believe what you want. but when you start implying that to believe in God means that you are simply brainwashed by society to believe it or imply that I reject logic because my proof of God's existence doesn't suffice your beliefs, then you are a jackass!!! and I freaking swear, I am going to go off on the next person who makes such a comment!!! having faith does not make us weak. It does not mean we are brainwashed. It does not mean that we cannot think for ourselves. And it does not mean that we do not rationalize events that are out of the ordinary!!!
Anyone who makes such comments is arrogant, stupid, and I swear I am going to go off on the next person that says something like that!
Related content
Comments: 283
But yet you believe that every animal on Earth lived within walking distance of Noah's ark? It's not us accusing you of ignoring logic, it's us saying what's obvious...
π: 0 β©: 1
That's what all the kids stories tell you. Noah actually spent 120 years building the ark and looking for those animals (according to what I've heard, anyways).Β
π: 0 β©: 1
Because people could totally live for that long w/out modern technology!
π: 0 β©: 2
I know this is an old post but felt inclined to mention that when God created man, they were perfect beings. When man fell into sin the decay and degeneration process began. By this it would be logical to believe that man's life span would gradually be shortened as copy after copy of man was produced. By this logic, life was perfect and has been decaying, a contrary belief to what is taught that life started imperfect and has been becoming more perfect as time goes on.
You probably have moved on from this topic, but it felt worth adding to it.
π: 0 β©: 1
"More perfect"? I'm sorry, I know this is nitpicky, but if you believe that that is what evolution is, then perhaps you should read up on some science and biology textbooks.
π: 0 β©: 1
That is how I would describe an attempt of survival of the fittest traits, a trial and error process to identify the most perfect biological system as evolution highly relies on. (P.S. I read up on plenty of science and biological systems. And if DNA replicators were that flawed to start with we would never end up with what we had to start with.) To describe it as "more perfect" is a simple and polite way of saying a single cell eventually becoming a colony of nearly perfect in tune cellular structures.
How would you describe the situation, IceBlast360?
π: 0 β©: 1
First off, the below event is not evolution, but rather how scientists theorize life began on Earth. Secondly, the process that is evolution does not work to make organisms "more perfect", but rather allowing them to survive and thrive as well as possible for the environment that they are currently living in- and when that environment changes, given time, the organism will change with it. This is where survival of the fittest ties in, meaning the more likely something is to survive, the more likely it is to reproduce.
π: 0 β©: 1
and the "new" trait passed on to make the better species. As for your first off, you are absolutely correct. I gleaned too far back into a similar yet isolated topic.
I see ultimately the topic points to the questions of this: Genes. Does mutation equals decay or does mutation equal new traits? Just as "more perfect" is a relative term, I would argue that an animal's genetics being modified for its survival to be considered an improvement and "given enough time" an eventual strive or competition for the greatest, or "more perfect", genetics. The argument of time can also be made relative and elevated to god like status.
I may be getting off topic though. Let us examine the original premiseΒ I mentioned earlier. What do you find irrational about the degrading of the human genome caused by replicating cells and inbreeding? Cellular replication degrades people everyday, these are the effects of aging and decay.
π: 0 β©: 2
I trust you are capable of doing your own research just as you trust me to be. While proof is supportive, it is not required to form and analyze a hypothesis. But when I looked through the topic I found plenty of articles supporting the degrade, or the 'destruction', of DNA during replication. If you have trouble or find contrary feel free to ask or point it out.
I would like to thank you for continuing to discuss the topic with me, although I would like to read more of you thoughts and ideas on the matter. My hopes are that we both come out with new views or at least something new to contemplate about the others perspective. I would also like to thank you for your respectful comments as many would often prefer to shout slanders with no meaning than to examine a topic.
I hope you are diligent at seeking truth and knowledge as you expect others to be.
I will be praying for you and I'll be awaiting your response to my previous question.
π: 0 β©: 0
Proof of the below claims?
π: 0 β©: 0
Β You know, before filling our bodies with toxic chemicals from processed foods to pollution, as well as stressing ourselves out with modern day society, it's a possibility that humans lived a lot longer than now. Also, I'm just answering you based on Biblical perspective, I never said I was right.Β
π: 0 β©: 1
A few hundred years ago, there was neither nor... and even then the avg life expectancy was only to about 60...
π: 0 β©: 1
I'm talking about thousands of years ago, before people recorded their age.
π: 0 β©: 1
Dude, people have been recording their ages for longer than we've been recording dates...
π: 0 β©: 0
So true you know how many times people have said ive been brainwashed a lot they say im ignorant when in fact it is them theres no logic towards evolution none at all like everything evolving after billions of years weres the logic in that? And why exacly is all evolution according to millions or billions of years also its completly oppisite of the bible why?
π: 1 β©: 0
Believing in God makes me logical because it gives me a bigger picture of the world. Having a belief in a higher power does not make us dumb. Religious people can be smart too.
π: 1 β©: 0
What? Proof? I thought you didn't need it. Faith is belief in absence of proof. How dare you offend your lord with such evil things? Logic and proofs are things of satan!
π: 0 β©: 2
What's easier to believe, that good is the truth because it is consistent and takes on the form of the universe? Or that a particle of dust spawned in the middle of our universe and created a world that just so happens to fit perfectly together so that it functions, but not entirely, and then dies without a purpose other than to recycle energy. So far I'm thinking faith is more logical, simply because it's more open to ideas that synchronize rather than a few paradox observations slopped together.Β
π: 0 β©: 1
If the truth was what is easy to believe, how many truths would there be?
π: 0 β©: 1
Looks like there are many religions, and many different interpretations for each.
π: 0 β©: 1
I just meant truth in general. Whatever the truth is, there's only one of it, and all consistent things are a part of it.Β
π: 0 β©: 1
What works in reality isΒ consistent.
π: 0 β©: 1
I think that it's absolutely hilarious that a lot of people think Christians "ignore logic" yet basically believe that the mighty dinosaurs evolved into little birds.... I don't get some people
π: 0 β©: 1
How is it logical to think a dead jew could rise from the dead? Or that some supernatural being has always existed without a beginning?
π: 0 β©: 2
When we do bad, like murder, we can't predict our circumstances and we end up hurting ourselves and others. This is a non-truth because it cannot be understood or reasoned with. When we do good, we always know the circumstance. Our hearts are more open, and no one gets hurt. This is a truth. The truth, or goodness, never becomes false. The truth has always existed. God is the truth, He has always existed. Therefore, he is not bound by the creation he made and can rise from the dead if he chooses, because he is not bound non-truth, or sin, like us. God isn't a difficult concept, actually.Β
π: 0 β©: 0
Agreed.
π: 0 β©: 0
Thank you! People can believe what they want honestly, I personally do believe in God so what? I'm not hurting anybody, I'm not forcing them to believe in Him, I'll treat anyone with respect so long as they treat me with respect. Heck even if they are disrespectful I'll still try and treat them with respect. Thank you for making this stamp and sorry if I rambled a bit, bad habit of mine
π: 0 β©: 0
Yes, it kinda does mean that, since there is no logical reason to believe in your or ANY god.
π: 0 β©: 1
Like there's no logical reason for the observation of an experiment to affect it's result?
π: 0 β©: 1
There IS a logical reason, and we are well aware of it and minimize it to the best of our ability. It still doesn't justify believing things with zero evidence at all. Even if the things I believe aren't perfect, and never will be, they are closer to correct than your illogical assumptions.
π: 0 β©: 2
You have never met the Spaghetti Monster, I see. You will.
π: 0 β©: 1
I believe in the FSM.
π: 0 β©: 1
... Freight system mechanics?
Fascist Slot-Machines?
Fucking Sadistic Masochism?
Flying Sewage Merde?
π: 0 β©: 1
Flying Spaghetti Monster.
π: 0 β©: 1
Oh no you see, I have converted to the true religion now! The Flying Tagliatelle Monster!
π: 0 β©: 1
Ah I see! Do tell me of this fine new religion!
π: 0 β©: 0
Tell me, how is an experimental alteration through observation within empirical and rational logic? at most, it would have been dismissed as a "paranormal, pseudoscientific phenomena" if it wasn't discovered that observation causes it through empirical means.
Of course, we both may not even know.... And honestly you just said something completely illogical, how are the things you believe closer to correct than what I believe in? that's just a heavily biased statement that was, in all honesty, random, I mean there hasn't even been a show of evidence or rational arguments and yet you are already impliedly claiming that your belief is "intellectualy superior" to mine, which in my opinion seems arrogant from this side, but I don't wanna judge you
π: 0 β©: 1
They are closer to correct because they are based on what I can observe rather than being based on faith and a book. I never claimed to be intellectually superior, those are your own words. I also never called you arrogant, your own words again. You have already judged me, friend. (:
π: 0 β©: 1
It does not exactly mean that, there's also several reasons of why a deity would exist, plus why are you exactly closer to correct? science? it has not proven nor disproven the existance of a divine being, and I can use it too.
Of course, I said that, same with "judging you", but that's because you said that your set of beliefs were more correct, and than those who hold a religious creed without even giving a reason, I'm backing my statements on what you just said, which has traits of such things.
π: 0 β©: 1
Science has disproven nearly everything in the bible. Common sense also disproves much of it, but Christians fail to see it for fear of being wrong.
For starters, the FIRST verse in the bible.
"In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth."
Right off the bat, this was not translated properly, for instance. "God" was changed from "gods." Originally, there was not one "God." Most other religions on earth have had multiple gods. Christianity did too.
Humans change religion as they please. That's why Christians today are nothing like they were hundreds of years ago, or even tens of years ago.
If the bible were true, and written by the word of gods/a God, why is it not CLEARLY written? Why is it full of symbols and metaphors? Why doesn't it say anywhere "If you get a cut and it becomes infected, you should clean it regularly and keep it wrapped?" Why is it simply full of useless information and threats that you go to hell if you don't believe AND believe in the RIGHT WAYS?
There is no medical advice, no instructions on building things to save lives, no instructions on how to create a great government that will make all happy, no NOTHING that is of any help to anyone.
π: 0 β©: 1
When did judaism or christianity have more than one God? you mean the neolithic with the venuses and other fertility/food goddesses? Yeah, people would have worshipped that before, but if I may ask, so? is not a secret humanity does mistakes, and it's often just proof of it's interpretation subjectiveness. Keep in mind that Judaism's (from which christianity's formed) also's one of oldest monotheistic religions documented, and posibly older than that. It the same thing as with phylosophical beliefs.
Because it wasn't written by a god, it was written by humans with divine inspiration, why is it not clearly written? because of it's higher range of interpretation, like an allegory, to keep more information in less space, some laws are written that way AND treated as such too. Of course, it's harder to know when it's right or not but that seems to be the point, it also mentions things like "clean an cut before it becomes infected", but if I'm not wrong, many texts of ancient epochs use similar forms of narrative.
why does it threaten with things if it's not followed? because that is how pretty much every law works: by threatening with punishment if it's not followed, where is it different from "if you steal, you're going to jail"? There's not much "useless" information, modern morality has many of it's roots on it.
There's no advice because we're supposed to find our own way.
π: 0 β©: 1
Judaism and Christianity both stem from religions which worshiped multiple Gods. The "God" you now claim to be the only god was originally one of many gods. He was the "storm god." Do some research, it's quite interesting.
No, my friend, more information in less space would not be metaphors and symbols. It would be straightforward lists and instructions.
So God magically "saves" some people from death and injury, yet he won't leave a list of how to care for ourselves and our wounds> He lets us die of infected cuts and other minor injuries? He lets us figure out on our own that HE created bacteria which harm us? He lets these bacteria kill us and maim us and your only response to this is "he wants us to find our own way."
Our modern morality is not so much morality as it is people trying to control others. The majority of humans, by nature, do not want to harm others. Most of us don't walk around planning to rape, murder, and rob others. Those people are the minority. Yet Christians constantly claim that we are all sinners. Why? The majority of us is doing the best we can to support ourselves and our family without hurting others in the process. How is a world like that one you consider to be full of sin? Because the bible tells you it is? Tell me, where is all this "sin" everyone goes on about?
π: 0 β©: 2
... I do not know where you are getting your info, but with 3 classes and a extensive read on biblical and religious history, with an atheist perspective, I have never heard of Yahweh having come from a storm god.
π: 0 β©: 0
May I ask for a source and assistance on the research of your points? since I would like to know since when a storm god can cause the ground to break apart and since most teachings say he's a god of pretty much everything.
"It would be straightforward lists and instructions." Exactly why it is so full of subjective terms then.
It's my interpretative response, maybe there's more, but yeah; Isn't it like natural selection? or would you rather expect yourself to be completely dependant? I mean, it's just like in a videogame, who's the better player? the one who started with a level 70 character and all the high-level gear or the one who went through the game leveling him up, extiguishing the mobs and learning the strategies to get the same?.... And why do you mention so much "infections and other minor injuries"? are you refering to a particular case?
Is not about trying to hurt others in the process, is the fact that they don't care about the others and are heavily biased towards one's own interests, and if the other becomes hurt then they don't care and tell him to "grow up" or "deal with it", and in the event that something arises then things could easily get ugly, you give one a ton of money and he spends it on himself rather than helping the poor ones close by, or rather, (and proven by history), just plain kill someone who pissed you off, or try to take advantage of someone for your own benefit when he doesn't even know you do; it's not being a complete monster who wrecks stuff for the evulz or something like that, it's egoism, everyone has it at different proportions, and it's a pretty risky thing.
It's the fact that there's that huge risk who makes humanity "bad", try putting a person in a world of complete goodness and chances are that some of the stuff can be ruined, it's a whole lot harder for 1000 people to build a tower than for 1 with explosives to wreck it.
π: 0 β©: 1
And you believe that following your one and only God, the one true God, all other religions are wrong, it must be YOUR GOD, that humanity will prevail and become better?
You don't even know the history of your religion. It borrowed ideas from Paganism so that it was easier to convert Pagans. It's plain as day that Christianity was created, by man, and made up, by man, just to manipulate other men.
π: 0 β©: 1
| Next =>