Forums → WEPR → The Religion Debate Thread
| 704 | 250993 |
So yeah, our threads on religion have long since died out, so I figured it would be time to start afresh here!
Do you believe God exists (I know almost all of you don't)? Do you feel religion is important today? Is it a force for good? Discuss everything related to that here!
I'm going to start the ball rolling:
We all know about the rise of ISIS and the terrible acts it perpetuates. Does that show that Islam and religion in general is an awful concept? Is it the people who twist it? Or is it fundamentally an evil force?
Roping in the WERP frequenters
@MageGrayWolf @Kasic @Hahiha @FishPreferred @Doombreed @09philj
- 704 Replies
I will be bref in my answer because we will surely turn around x'D
People will almost always have a kind of prejudice towards others. This happens for numerous reasons. In the situation that you are describing, a sense of apprehension or caution towards someone is a natural feeling, most likely caused by a kind of protective instinct. It's also possible that they may have looked like someone you have associated with being "bad" in the past.
Maybe you're right as I said I can't actually prove scientifically my feelings :/
As for anti matter what I would to say is: why we need to call something "anti", idea who was in my mind is maybe the matter have two polarity one as matter and one as anti matter switching to one when needed like an off/on ?
So are you questioning equations from practical fields or equations from theoretical physics?
I'm more of a practical guy I have to say, so I prefer taste things by myself, but I was asking about theoretical stuff.
I apologize if I went outside the topic for some of that, it would help if you could be more specific or give an example as to some of the more ambiguous subjects you use.
It's really difficult to be more clear x'D as I said it's some feeling of my own, I've just emitted some hypothesis about what I've perceived, I can agree that is ridiculous if we relate this to our own scientific knowledge. But sometimes it can be a good way to progress to remake basics on question. At least it's what I think.
One thing I know is we can't trust anyone, some scientists are Corrupt so I try to understand world by myself, I'm not perfect at all but I'm sure I can trust me.
I believe this is another psychological effect, you would have thought "the water has been made good, so it must taste better too." As such, the water would indeed taste better. The mind is capable of fooling itself with just about anything, even if you aren't aware of the thought process in the first place.
Sure I take this in count too but, we don't need to forget all possibilities because one seem more real than other, reality is often far from what we think.
About atoms, as I said proven by others, I've studied that too but if by some hasard what we've learned is not the reality how can be the rest be ? I'm confused about you was thinking I talking about nationality.. It wasn't my point at all, philosopher are thinker so what I've in mind they were emitting possibility, I'm sure people in their time was thinking they were mad x'D (in case of: I'm not thinking they are)
What I think is our comprehension is always mutating, depending of the period people was Thinking a lot of different things, it's just like a pong game you take the ball, repel it and someone do that in a different way and the cycle repeat about the ages.
Religion can be defined as: "a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith." I think attention should be equally devoted to smaller beliefs, even just one person's.
I'm not disagree with that but some people here surely prefer debate about, religion fact than my own beliefs about specific subject, debating of that in another thread is more beneficial for all in my opinion.
To bring the topic back on track again, here is a specific and rather disturbing verse in the bible. 2 Kings 2:23 - 24
I would like a Christian's opinion on that. It does not seem like spreading God's message of love, not in the slightest, this one. I am pretty sure there's plenty more of those in the Bible... -_-
I've heard people say, in relation to that story, that context is important and all that. But frankly I cannot imagine any context that makes this one better, and I never really got a satisfying answer.
@Doombreed and @HahiHa
Remember that God is a just God. Although He is loving, we all deserve punishment and back in the Old Testament times people were punished sometimes and sometimes people received the mercy and grace from God. However, since the death of Christ, believers are exempt from the punishment of God because Jesus was already punished for all of our sins.
@lozerfac3
But that isn't the point at all. If at least God had been hard, but fair, in his judgment of the little rascals, that wouldn't be much of an issue. But he sent two bears which ended up killing 42 kids! Just for making fun of someone's bald head! I mean, I know that getting bald can be traumatizing for many men, I totally get that. But what is described in that verse is just so much over the top that it flew into space and is now halfway to Alpha Centauri.
Especially considering that young boys make fun of a lot of things, all the time. Which is not particularly nice, but usually not considered more than a trivial offence. Humanity would have been wiped out long ago by the hands of God if he was as vindictive about everything as he is here. Oh wait, that's what he almost did by flooding all of Earth.
But really, how could anyone, even strong believers, be OK with this much overkill? Do you fear your God that much, or am I missing a crucial piece of 'context' that would make it somewhat more digestible?
Maybe the boys were so young (although their age is really not specified) that according to ancient beliefs they were not yet considered human beings, so it's fine slaughtering them? Except that those beliefs, as far as I know, are not being held any longer by most people.
It isn't good enough to say "God is just, so they got what they deserved". That's begging the question and demonstrably false. As I stated earlier:
This is the same deity who ...
Drowns all terrestrial life, except for whatever can be fit into one medium-sized cargo ship, because He didn't like what a bunch of other people were doing and/or who was marrying whom.
Slaughters helpless children in their sleep just to make a point.
Orchestrates the extermination of all Canaanites to make room for the Israelites.
Burns His chosen people alive or inflicts deadly diseases upon them, multiple times, for speaking out against Him.
To which I can also add the killing of these other children and killing His own priests for burning sacrificial offerings in the wrong kind of fire.
However, since the death of Christ, believers are exempt from the punishment of God because Jesus was already punished for all of our sins.1 That would make eternal salvation dependent upon nothing but credulity and circumstance, which is not just by any means.
2 There is still no logical connection between the the two: So, God sends Jesus, Jesus gets killed, and people make a religion out of it. In what way does any of this make anyone exempt from the divine retribution they supposedly deserve?
But that isn't the point at all. If at least God had been hard, but fair, in his judgment of the little rascals, that wouldn't be much of an issue. But he sent two bears which ended up killing 42 kids! Just for making fun of someone's bald head! I mean, I know that getting bald can be traumatizing for many men, I totally get that. But what is described in that verse is just so much over the top that it flew into space and is now halfway to Alpha Centauri.
Especially considering that young boys make fun of a lot of things, all the time. Which is not particularly nice, but usually not considered more than a trivial offence. Humanity would have been wiped out long ago by the hands of God if he was as vindictive about everything as he is here. Oh wait, that's what he almost did by flooding all of Earth.But really, how could anyone, even strong believers, be OK with this much overkill? Do you fear your God that much, or am I missing a crucial piece of 'context' that would make it somewhat more digestible?
Honestly, I do fear Him that much. But since you asked, you can consider the boys' mockery as really offensive to God. I'm afraid I can't explain it well but please allow me to refer you to gotquestions.org
Maybe the boys were so young (although their age is really not specified) that according to ancient beliefs they were not yet considered human beings, so it's fine slaughtering them? Except that those beliefs, as far as I know, are not being held any longer by most people
I actually never heard this belief before. Actually I would think that they are older.
It isn't good enough to say "God is just, so they got what they deserved". That's begging the question and demonstrably false. As I stated earlier:
This is the same deity who ...
Drowns all terrestrial life, except for whatever can be fit into one medium-sized cargo ship, because He didn't like what a bunch of other people were doing and/or who was marrying whom.
Slaughters helpless children in their sleep just to make a point.
Orchestrates the extermination of all Canaanites to make room for the Israelites.
Burns His chosen people alive or inflicts deadly diseases upon them, multiple times, for speaking out against Him.To which I can also add the killing of these other children and killing His own priests for burning sacrificial offerings in the wrong kind of fire.
This is the diety who is holy in all His ways. Because He is perfectly holy, this is the God who requires perfection and cannot stand any amount of sin in his presence. One thing to remember is that God is a jealous God. "Do not worship any other god, for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God." (Exodus 34:14) He does everything for His own glory. If you think about it, if God did anything for anything else other than His glory, He would become an idolator, a hypocrite.
I kinda added stuff to the debate and left things unanswered, but I hope I answered your point.
1 That would make eternal salvation dependent upon nothing but credulity and circumstance, which is not just by any means
What circumstance?
2 There is still no logical connection between the the two: So, God sends Jesus, Jesus gets killed, and people make a religion out of it. In what way does any of this make anyone exempt from the divine retribution they supposedly deserve?
Because Jesus lived a perfect life and therefore served as the ultimate sacrifice for all believers. Jesus endured a life on Earth full of brokeness, disease, death, and temptation staying faithful to God the whole time. Our sins were transferred over to Jesus and His righteousness was transferred over to us.
What circumstance?
You didn't get to decide if you were born recently or thousands of years ago. This is inherently unfair to the people who lived before Jesus and were under an absurdly harsher set of rules.
Jesus endured a life on Earth full of brokeness, disease, death, and temptation staying faithful to God the whole time.
If God is Jesus, then He was merely faithful to Himself, which is pointless grandstanding.
You didn't get to decide if you were born recently or thousands of years ago. This is inherently unfair to the people who lived before Jesus and were under an absurdly harsher set of rules.
I firmly believe that the gospel is offensive in this very way, except that Jesus invites us not to be offended. It is by grace through faith we are saved.
I God is Jesus, then He was merely faithful to Himself, which is pointless grandstanding.
Like I said, He does everything for His own glory, so I wouldn't call it pointless...
Honestly, I do fear Him that much. But since you asked, you can consider the boys' mockery as really offensive to God. I'm afraid I can't explain it well but please allow me to refer you to gotquestions.org
Their interpretation does relativise the situation very slightly, and this kind of behaviour by God when insulted directly or through his prophets, is typically what a vindictive egomaniac would do, so I guess it makes sense. It doesn't make it any better though. The scope of the punishment is still waaaayyyy over the top.
What I thought is funny is how the article tries to turn the term "youth" progressively to "men 20yo or older". At that time, I'm pretty sure a man of 20 years was already considered adult, not youth; people came of age much faster back then, as far as I know. They may not have been young children, but they were most likely not close to 20.
I also find it kind of revealing how the article ends up calling them rebels. I guess that's one way of trying to legitimize this mass slaughter. Many men in high places are guilty of the same in our days.
Lastly, and this has probably not much to do with the rest, but it stroke me as really odd: Why are the bears suddenly female? The verse just mentions 'bears', and the article seems to be fine with that at first, and suddenly out of the blue says "The Lord’s punishment was the mauling of 42 of them by two female bears. " This is the only time the gender of the bears are even mentioned in the article, and there is absolutely no justification about why that is so, or why it matters. It just makes no sense to add this in there, and comes across as a gratuitous bit of misogyny. Or is the writer American and thought every article needs to have a female character to be politically correct? Joking aside though, if the author pulls that one out of his hat for no reason and with such ease, I can only wonder what else he pulled out of it.
Seems no one already remarks this so I will do it :
This is the diety who is holy in all His ways. Because He is perfectly holy, this is the God who requires perfection and cannot stand any amount of sin in his presence.
So you're telling me God is perfect ? And he cannot be stand any amount of sin in his presence..
Sadly it seem even God isn't perfect because according to history he made very cruel stuff whitout any valuable reasons for me..
Furthermore just read yourself.. :
One thing to remember is that God is a jealous God. "Do not worship any other god, for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God
Jealousy is a sin isn't it ? We call it Envy I am right ? So that perfect God who cannot be in presence of any sins is Jealous ? Seems he will have trouble to live with himself..
It's incredible for me sorry..
This is the diety who is holy in all His ways. Because He is perfectly holy, this is the God who requires perfection and cannot stand any amount of sin in his presence. One thing to remember is that God is a jealous God. "Do not worship any other god, for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God." (Exodus 34:14) He does everything for His own glory. If you think about it, if God did anything for anything else other than His glory, He would become an idolator, a hypocrite.He's already a hypocrite. He calls for peace, love, and forgiveness as He systematically wipes out entire civilizations and shunts the souls off to unending torment for the most trivial offences. Offences many of them could never have even known about until it was too late. So please explain what you mean by " perfectly holy", as at this point it appears to be synonymous with "tyrannically depraved".
What circumstance?The circumstance of their upbringing (but also what Emp said). Christian children raised in Christian families have an all-expenses-paid pass to salvation that equally dedicated Hindu, Muslim, Hebrew, Buddhist, Zoroastrian, whatever children are denied. All the Christians have to do is not question the beliefs indoctrinated into them, whereas everyone else would be required to reject their own faith and teachings to take up Christianity, and in order to do that, they have to actually know about it.
Because Jesus lived a perfect life and therefore served as the ultimate sacrifice for all believers.Because bacon is greasy and delicious, and therefore serves as the ultimate pizza topping. It makes just as much sense, when you think about it.
Our sins were transferred over to Jesus and His righteousness was transferred over to us.See, this is the part that actually matters. It just has absolutely no relation to the crucifixion and suggests that the sins people commit only affect Jesus; not themselves. It's also handwaving the fact that Almighty God shouldn't need any convoluted workaround to absolve sins in the first place.
I firmly believe that the gospel is offensive in this very way, except that Jesus invites us not to be offended. It is by grace through faith we are saved.That really doesn't explain anything at all.
Sorry if I'm keeping you waiting. I would love to respond but I don't have time to counter all your guys' arguments. Also, I admit I haven't studied the Bible well enough to tell you about the complete character of God, so there will still be plenty of more questions if I do decide to continue. However, if you are so curious, it would be nice if one of you would outline all of the existing questions so that I can organize my thoughts? If not, I'll be praying.
Actually, I really like this:
"Evilbible.com does not stop to consider that if one were to catapult the practices, genocide, and barbarism of these cultures/peoples into the 21st century and broadcast it around the world via CNN, there would most certainly be a global outcry for severe military action and punishment. And if modern, “enlightened” man would call for such severe judgment against such atrocities, why should evilbible.com criticize God for carrying out the same thing" (gotquestions.org)
You must be logged in to post a reply!