newyorknewyork wrote:NardDogNation wrote:newyorknewyork wrote:The problem is you are blaming the tool rather then the wilder. Like blaming the gun rather then the shooter.
Am I just blaming the wielder? These are some excerpts taken directly from the Bible:
Leviticus 20:13
"If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives."
Leviticus 20:27
A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death: they shall stone them with stones: their blood shall be upon them.
Chronicles 15:12-13:
And they entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and with all their soul, but that whoever would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, should be put to death, whether young or old, man or woman.
It doesn't seem like people who do malevolent things in the name of the Bible misunderstand its meaning. If anything, it seems that people are embolden to do those malevolent things because the Bible gives them the platitude to do so. So how do you begin to reconcile stuff like this?
newyorknewyork wrote:And for some reason only Religion is under trial while all other tools are let be.Should all scientific theory be ruled out because man can use it incorrectly to practically end man kind and has caused wars and fear between countries? Since all history and tools are capable of being corrupted then under your views you shouldn't believe anything and should have any stances on any issues. Sams coming out could be a lie and he isn't really gay and has been a made up media creation and until I see him actually have sexual intercourse with a man I don't believe it.
That's a strawman's argument. In two separate posts I have explicitly labelled all "tools" as being flawed; religion being among them. Of these "tools" though, only religion presents itself as being infallible or like jrodmc portrays it "the final authority".
newyorknewyork wrote:Man didn't create Religion, Science, Technology, Government, etc.. Man is imitating the order that was already established in heaven. Before man ever had the technology to do so we were able to build pyramids that today we still don't understand how they were capable of doing so given there resources. In the bible it talks about heavens and universe yet man didn't have the technology or the education to know about these things until the 1700s. Homo sapiens were supposed to have evolved 250k-400k years ago according to scientific theory. So it took around 250-400k years to discover fire, but after we discovered fire it only took 4,000 yrs to advance to the level we are at today with no literary documentation of life before hand.
Men were looking at stars before Christianity was even conceived of. For example, the Greeks built entire stories centered around the arrangement and movement of stars (see the Greek Constellations). It really doesn't take much to look up at the stars and conceptualize the "heavens" to create clever stories. Every major culture did it.
And yes, scientific advancements have been increasing at an exponential rate. As societies become more centralized, grow and interact with other societies, you get that kind of trend. I took a "History of Science" class and could forward you a couple articles about it (not being condescending; it really is fascinating). This trend would've happened with or without Christianity.
newyorknewyork wrote:There is more likely hood of God creating the earth making all things possible then all things happening by chance. To a lesser extent would be like if people decided to randomly build houses without any blueprints on how to even build houses yet ended up building New York city. If man made up God then then there should be a documented civilization that was established before God was ever mentioned. And we should know of a civilization governing body who first started to establish God. Yet there is 0 documentation of this and tons of documentation claiming the opposite. But yet because the documentation can be corrupted or misused it shouldn't be accepted. Then nothing should ever be accepted.
That doesn't make the Bible/Christianity inherently true. Besides the point, I think we've strayed too far from the topic of the thread. As I've said before, you're welcome to worship as you see fit. My only contention in all of this is that it is faulty to try to build an argument, public policy, or anything of this ilk on the basis of religious convictions. The Bible is not too big on facts and facts are what we need when making these types of decisions.
At that point in societies time it must have been necessary to do so. Just like at one point in society it was necessary for man to sleep with its relatives to fill the earth and then later on it became unlawful. Or sacrifice burnt offerings to God until Jesus came then he became the sacrifice so man no longer had to sacrifice burnt offerings. God must have had to be stricter as at this time man may have not been able to handle life without these rules. Like I stated earlier Gods eternal law is Love. All laws underneath Gods law of Love are dependent on where man was at in its development. Why would man alone decide that these doings were wrong? What would influence man to even know or understand what right or wrong even was when it comes to sex?
Straw man argument no, looking to expose some hypocrisy yes. Your whole knowledge base(mine as well), viewpoints, beliefs are all based on the teachings from men/women that were made through theories, viewpoints, beliefs of other men/women. From your parents, teachers, professors, authors of books you read. Your viewpoint of man creating God and using God in order to keep simple minded people in check was a theory created by a man and taught to you by another man which has manipulated or influenced how you perceive the bible and life. The Big bang theory with man evolving from monkeys even though is simply a theory created by man to give scientific reasoning behind its creation. Though doesn't hold enough facts to call it more then theory. This theory is basically considered a fact by I bet many in this thread, is basically taught as facts in school and has eliminated many's belief in God through *faith* in science to one day give us all the answers. Now that's manipulation. But even though it was written by man, doesn't hold enough facts to consider it more then theory, and has been used to manipulate how man views its creation its okay because its science and not religion. Your political views, what ever they are have been taught to you by man/women based on political theories on how Government should run. I bet what ever your political views are you believe them to be the correct way for government to run due to how you were educated/molded/manipulated into believing so.
The same reasoning used to denounce religion do you apply to your own beliefs? Is it possible that you and others in this thread could be just as manipulated as you claim believers to have been and be? Or is that not possible because your so more *enlighten* then us simple minded folk? I could go on theorizing how man so desperately wanted to eliminate God from existence thus allowing them to go after there desires without the guilt of sinning.
Also earlier you stated something like the enlightened during these biblical days didn't need God. Does that mean that they didn't partake in wars? Commit any crimes like murder, rape, theft etc? Had the same social and economic standing? Didn't oppressed anyone else? Use political &/or financial power to benefit themselves over mankind? I don't think there was ever a Godless utopia like that. Probably more like some super wealthy men who didn't think they needed God because they had the money to buy what they wanted or had the political power to do things to there liking.
At that point in societies time it must have been necessary to do so. Just like at one point in society it was necessary for man to sleep with its relatives to fill the earth and then later on it became unlawful. Or sacrifice burnt offerings to God until Jesus came then he became the sacrifice so man no longer had to sacrifice burnt offerings. God must have had to be stricter as at this time man may have not been able to handle life without these rules. Like I stated earlier Gods eternal law is Love. All laws underneath Gods law of Love are dependent on where man was at in its development. Why would man alone decide that these doings were wrong? What would influence man to even know or understand what right or wrong even was when it comes to sex?
So now the rules in the Bible are fluid? And if they are fluid, who gets to decide its evolution to adapt to the standards of the day? God? Because I (and religious fundamentalists) never got the link to the webnair updating us.
Straw man argument no, looking to expose some hypocrisy yes. Your whole knowledge base(mine as well), viewpoints, beliefs are all based on the teachings from men/women that were made through theories, viewpoints, beliefs of other men/women. From your parents, teachers, professors, authors of books you read. Your viewpoint of man creating God and using God in order to keep simple minded people in check was a theory created by a man and taught to you by another man which has manipulated or influenced how you perceive the bible and life. The Big bang theory with man evolving from monkeys even though is simply a theory created by man to give scientific reasoning behind its creation. Though doesn't hold enough facts to call it more then theory. This theory is basically considered a fact by I bet many in this thread, is basically taught as facts in school and has eliminated many's belief in God through *faith* in science to one day give us all the answers. Now that's manipulation. But even though it was written by man, doesn't hold enough facts to consider it more then theory, and has been used to manipulate how man views its creation its okay because its science and not religion. Your political views, what ever they are have been taught to you by man/women based on political theories on how Government should run. I bet what ever your political views are you believe them to be the correct way for government to run due to how you were educated/molded/manipulated into believing so.
But there was no hypocrisy to expose. My thinkings have been consistent with my original point. More importantly, I never suggested that science is infallible. Instead, you have been the one suggesting that of me and my viewpoint, which is incorrect. If you want to disagree, then I challenge you to find the specific quote where I said or even intimated this. I just think that science is a much more effective method in understanding the world around me and all of its mysteries because of reasons that I think should be obvious by now.
I think this point is best demonstrated by the "Big Bang Theory" vs your creationists viewpoint. Contrary to how you portray it, this theory is not the product of fanciful storytelling by scientists that are looking to counter stories presented in your Bible. There is actual centuries worth of study that went into forming this understanding and it is pretty compelling. We know that stars are constantly moving further away from each other, which suggests that there is still a residual effect from the initial explosion. And the most central piece of evidence is that there is still a consistent and constant "cosmic noise" that was uncovered about 40 years ago using a "horn antenna" in NJ. So on one side, we have a position that orients its understanding around evidence and established laws of the universe; on the other, we have one that orients its understanding first and then expect people to take them on their word about it i.e. "faith".
The same reasoning used to denounce religion do you apply to your own beliefs? Is it possible that you and others in this thread could be just as manipulated as you claim believers to have been and be? Or is that not possible because your so more *enlighten* then us simple minded folk? I could go on theorizing how man so desperately wanted to eliminate God from existence thus allowing them to go after there desires without the guilt of sinning.
All the time. As I said before, I once considered myself Catholic and using this reasoning is how I managed to transition into an agnostic/deist. And no, I do not think that I am currently being manipulated as a believer in science. The fact is, there is no manipulation when it comes to science since the entire field is based on deductive reasoning. There needs to be a body of observable evidence and that evidence must consistently produce a certain effect or result to be considered legitimate. Religion has no such burden. That is the difference between my position and yours.
Also earlier you stated something like the enlightened during these biblical days didn't need God. Does that mean that they didn't partake in wars? Commit any crimes like murder, rape, theft etc? Had the same social and economic standing? Didn't oppressed anyone else? Use political &/or financial power to benefit themselves over mankind? I don't think there was ever a Godless utopia like that. Probably more like some super wealthy men who didn't think they needed God because they had the money to buy what they wanted or had the political power to do things to there liking.
I never suggested anything close to that. And since even the religious partook in these evils, doesn't that kind of defeat its purpose? If people are going to be the same ****ty people with religion as they are with it, what's the point?
2/15/2014 1:46 PM
