Yes, but what about the things that are all bad? Such as heroin?
I can't categorically explain every possible thing in the world, but for heroin, I would presume that it has some purpose against/for other plants and/or insects.
Edit: Also, isn't heroin a synthetic product? I.e. created by humans, by extracting & taking some components in some plants and chemically treating them in some weird way that completely defies their purpose of existing in the first place?
Edit: Also, isn't heroin a synthetic product? I.e. created by humans, by extracting & taking some components in some plants and chemically treating them in some weird way that completely defies their purpose of existing in the first place?
Okay, you got me there.
Opium and THC, though, can be found in poppy and hemp without any extraction and purification. And there's no real reason it's in there either, I believe.
Note that I'm not challenging you to explain everything there is to plants, feel free not to answer this post. :)
Opium and THC, though, can be found in poppy and hemp without any extraction and purification. And there's no real reason it's in there either, I believe.
Note that I'm not challenging you to explain everything there is to plants, feel free not to answer this post. :)
As far as I know, opium has been used as a pain reliever for surgeries in the past. According to Wikipedia, THC is a cannabis extract, right? I don't know enough of it, but the Wikipedia article does point at some positive medicinal uses.
Also, many plants are just simply beautiful to watch (and often, to smell). People grow poppies because their flowers are beautiful. Poppy seeds are used in bread, too.
Some denominations even favor the yet older version from the 1700s.
the king james version should be the best, because it was translated from the original hebrew and greek bible, and i think the swedish and finnish bibles are translated from the king james version. when you translate something, you lose information, but when you translate a translation, you lose even more information.
and all of those who chose to reject him, will be eternally separated from him together with the rest of those who chose to live in sin,
eternal punishment for a few sins seems like a stretch to me. nothing lasts forever. but i think 'venomfangx' (a 'crazy' christian literalist on youtube) had an interesting way to explain that. he said that the punishment expands when the authority becomes greater. for example, if we 'sin' against a child, the punishment we get from the child will not be so great, but if we sin against a police officer, it will be greater, and if we sin against god, we get infinite (eternal) punishment because god is 'infinite' and perfect.
i think we deserve eternal heaven (because we didn't choose to exist), but for some reason we are between heaven and hell: earth. it's probably because yin and yang would become too imbalanced otherwise.
Swedishmartin wrote:
Yes, but what about the things that are all bad? Such as heroin?
heroin is a drug that makes you feel almost like you're in heaven.
This post made remembered me a lot of this youtube movie http://nl.youtube.com/watch?v=urlTBBKTO68
It depicts God as a cloud, and is being outreasoned... so it might be offensive to you. This is not my intention at all, so if you are, then feel free to ignore or delete this post.
I do think it makes some valid points, and I was wondering what you think about the points that are being made (In particular the question "What would happen if all good persons would go to heaven?").
I was also wondering what assumptions about God were made in this movie that you disagree with (besides obvious things like how he is being depicted).
I will comment on the movie.
<man> I thought you were supposed to be all-merciful and all-forgiving?
<cloud> Only to people who believe that I exist!
That's not really the point.
Although God's extent of mercy and forgiveness is immeasurable, there is no meaning in mercy if one does not change their ways.
And when you're dead, how exactly are you going to change your ways?
It is not the "believing in God" in itself that saves us. Of course you will believe that God exists when he's sitting in the front of you.
God forgives our sins when we decide, from the bottom of our heart, to repent our sins, acknowledging that we would have no part in Heaven if it were not the sacrifice of The Messiah, and decide to follow God's will[1] from thereafter. Sin is, by the definition[2], disobeying God's will.
When you are standing in the front of God and you "decide to follow God's will" from thereafter... How exactly are you going to do that? Is your decision a honest one? Or are you just coerced into doing so because you don't see any other choice? Because there's simply no "tomorrow" to which you could postpone the decision? At that moment, you do not have the freedom of choice.
Sin cannot enter the Heaven – this is God's law, and that law does not have exceptions. Therefore, when you're dead and in the front of God, if you had not yet made the decision to follow God from all your heart, purifying you from the sin, you are not permitted in the Heaven.
<cloud> What do you think Heaven would be like if I let in every good person?
Again, this is incorrect. Here I will paraphrase someone else. What exactly is a "good person"? Are you a good person? Check out: http://www.goodpersontest.com/
God requires nothing short of being a "good person" every single moment in our life. That means never lying to anyone intentionally, never insulting someone[3], always being ready to help someone in need of help without expecting anything in return, never taking credit for something someone else did, and so on. A single failure of doing that is a sin. And as I concluded the earlier paragraph, sin cannot enter the Heaven. The penalty of sin is death.[4]
<cloud> You might as well have been a baby raper!
This is actually true. (Though it took some time for me to realize it.)
As recent psychological experiments (and some real life events) have demonstrated, even humans considering themselves "good" can perform the worst atrocities when sufficiently manipulated, for example by placing them in a group of people who all seem to approve those atrocities, or when feeling helplessness to do otherwise, or when fearing an authority, or under times of apathy, etc.
Truly, we are not all that different as humans.
In your mind you might despise or be puzzled about the people who cheered as Jesus was being judged to be crucified and who wanted a real criminal to be released instead, but if we were there, most of us would have done the same thing. Not because it was prophetized, but because humans are like that.
<man> Why do you allow bad things to happen... even to Christians who love you?
<cloud> I don't have time for this nonsense! <...>
Here I am inclined to agree with the cloud's answer, though for different reasons. This is a popular question that has a number of answers that depend on each possible situation.
I will choose three sections from the Bible that cover most cases. (I rephrased them a bit in modern English to make them easier to read.)
John 9:1-11 wrote:
As Jesus passed by, he saw a man who was blind from his birth.
His disciples asked him, saying, "Rabbi, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind?"
Jesus answered, "Neither had this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him."
<...>
When Jesus had spoken, he spat on the ground. He made clay of the spittle, and anointed the eyes of the blind man with the clay,
Then he said unto him: "Go, wash in the pool of Siloam" (which translated means "sent"). The blind man did as Jesus told, and went, and washed, and came back, seeing.
<...>
People who had previously seen him as a blind man, gossiped among themselves: "Isn't this the blind man that sat and begged?"
So they asked him: "How come you're not blind anymore?"
He answered and said, "A man that is called Jesus made clay, and anointed my eyes, and said unto me, Go to the pool of Siloam, and wash: and I went and washed, and I received sight."
Proverbs 3:5-12 wrote:
Trust in the LORD with all your heart. Do not rely on your own understanding. In all of your ways, know Him, and he will straighten your paths.
Do not be wise in your own eyes. Fear the LORD, and stay away from evil. It shall be healthy for your body, and refreshing for your bones.
Honor the LORD by giving from your own, and from the best of your harvest. And when you do that, your barns will be filled with plenty, and your presses shall be bursting with new wine.
My son, hold the chastening of the LORD in esteem, and be not vexed with his corrections. Because the LORDcorrects those whom he loves, like a father corrects the son whom he is pleased of.
Job wrote:
<... This book is a bit too long to quote here.
I'll just provide this link instead. Be sure to read chapters 2-3 and onwards from 32.
This book is a story written in poetic form about a honest God-fearing man who had calamities strike across him, and the resulting aftermath, in the form of dialog between the man, and his friends, and ultimately, God himself.>
<man> Let me return to earth for a day so I can tell my loved ones <...>
I won't bother quoting the cloud's response here.
Jesus once told a parable[5] about a man who died and begged just the same way as the man in that cartoon. The parable ends with these words:
> And he said, No, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.
> And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, even if one rose from the dead.
There have been people who have risen from the dead[8], and there have been people who claim to have visited the Hell[6], and people who claim to have visited the Heaven[7]. Still, not all people believe them.
1) John 8:10-11
2) Joshua 7:11
3) Proverbs 14:21
4) Romans 6:23
5) Luke 16:19-31
6) Google video
7) Low quality video or High quality video
8) Google video
Nevertheless, it made for a very interesting study. It is a good idea to assume good faith. In this case, good faith is that the movie represents the author's views of the Christian beliefs and that the author is open for corrections (or in this case, Baxter). Bad faith is that the movie aims to badmouth and ridicule the Christian beliefs by falsely representing its core ideas.
Let's make a truth/consequence table:
* Assuming = good faith, reality = good faith:
The author (and everyone else who reads it) gets useful answers and the world becomes a better place with more mutual understanding.
* Assuming = good faith, reality = bad faith:
A bad thing has been turned into a good thing. Maybe some effort was wasted, but has the writing of the answers really been a futile thing? Remember, the audience does not only consist of the malicious party.
* Assuming = bad faith, reality = good faith:
The author gets reinforcement for their view that Christians are not willing to justify their views, and the chasm widens further.
* Assuming = bad faith, reality = bad faith:
Nobody benefits anything, and everyone's views of how communication in the Internet is fruitless, are further solidified. And those who did assume good faith, get reinforcement for their view that Christians are not willing to justify their views, and the chasm widens further.
So you see, assuming good faith beats assuming bad faith regardless of the original intentions.
Nevertheless, it made for a very interesting study. It is a good idea to assume good faith. In this case, good faith is to assume that the movie represents the author's views of the Christian beliefs and that the author is open for corrections. Bad faith is to assume that the movie aims to badmouth the Christian beliefs by falsely representing its core ideas.
My experience of atheists making publications and videos which attack christianity (why is it *always* christianity? have you ever seen such an atheist video which would attack buddhism, hare krishna or islam?) with "logic" is that they are not trying to express their unbiased views, with the intention of seriously listening what others have to say about the subject.
Basically they are absolutely and completely convinced of their atheistic views, and there's absolutely nothing you can do to make them listen to anything else. They might pretend to listen in a friendly and open way, but the underlying reason is always the same: They listen to your responses only to try to find flaws and counter-arguments to them, not because they are honestly interested in what you have to say nor open to alternative ideas.
Some time ago I wrote this open letter in response to an anti-christian atheist video, criticizing it for its logical fallacies: http://warp.povusers.org/OpenLetters/ResponseTo10Questions.html
I sent a link to the admin of the website in question, and we had a short polite conversation by email. No matter how I tried to give alternative plausible explanations to his favorite bible verses, he wouldn't budge from his views (basically he had decided what the "correct" interpretation of those verses are, and wouldn't listen to any alternative, no matter how well I tried to explain), so I just ended the conversation.
why is it *always* christianity? have you ever seen such an atheist video which would attack buddhism, hare krishna or islam?
Because Christianity lends itself open for criticism, much like science does. (Though the means of validation are quite different.)
Criticise Islam publicly, and you will receive death threats.
Criticise Hare Krishna, and nobody will care. It's a hippie movement that touches nobody.
And Buddhism does not have a whole lot to criticise, considering that it is purely a manmade philosophy and it makes no claims otherwise, and especially because Buddhists do not have a missionary call. They don't care if you believe in their teachings or not.
And Buddhism does not have a whole lot to criticise, considering that it is purely a manmade philosophy and it makes no claims otherwise, and especially because Buddhists do not have a missionary call. They don't care if you believe in their teachings or not.
Hehe, yeah, that's what I call a great religion. :D
I was actually contemplating Buddhism several years ago, but decided on Hedonism instead, haha. Almost a complete opposite in practice.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
My experience of atheists making publications and videos which attack christianity with "logic" is that they are not trying to express their unbiased views, with the intention of seriously listening what others have to say about the subject.
Basically they are absolutely and completely convinced of their atheistic views, and there's absolutely nothing you can do to make them listen to anything else. They might pretend to listen in a friendly and open way, but the underlying reason is always the same: They listen to your responses only to try to find flaws and counter-arguments to them, not because they are honestly interested in what you have to say nor open to alternative ideas.
I found this post interesting, because I lurk on Slashdot to read the "discussions" there (I view it as a kind of study of a particular subculture), and that kind of argument is almost word for word what you'd commonly see whenever religion is brought up -- people from religion X (typically proponents of intelligent design) are close-minded, unwilling to listen to logical counter-arguments, and out to attack people who oppose their viewpoints wherever possible.
What this says to me is that a lot of people on both sides of the argument are not accomplishing anything useful. How do we get people to participate in informed debates instead of just screaming across the divide?
Pyrel - an open-source rewrite of the Angband roguelike game in Python.
Joined: 11/18/2006
Posts: 2426
Location: Back where I belong
Derakon wrote:
What this says to me is that a lot of people on both sides of the argument are not accomplishing anything useful. How do we get people to participate in informed debates instead of just screaming across the divide?
Science and religion tend to be always be at opposite ends of the spectrum, since science is based largely on facts and theories, and religion is based largely on faith and spirituality. It is possible to get people to calmly debate the two, but it's a rare sight;)
this sentence fascinates slightly so i can't help but to ask what would be a better medium than a book?
He could speak to every person directly... that would probably clear up a lot of things.
Tried it. Doesn't seem to be working out too well.
ON TOPIC:
Hey Bisqwit. I see on the Megaman 9 topic that you don't much care for the soundtrack because of its similarity to 5's (though that's probably why I like it so much myself, personally). Have you had the chance to actually play the game or see videos of it being played yet? What's your opinion on that, and do you think other companies should follow in Capcom's footsteps making "new classic" games?
someone is out there who will like you. take off your mask so they can find you faster.
I support the new Nekketsu Kouha Kunio-kun.
Hey Bisqwit. I see on the Megaman 9 topic that you don't much care for the soundtrack because of its similarity to 5's (though that's probably why I like it so much myself, personally). Have you had the chance to actually play the game or see videos of it being played yet? What's your opinion on that, and do you think other companies should follow in Capcom's footsteps making "new classic" games?
No, I have not yet even seen a video of its gameplay.
I don't own the console, and likely, the game won't even be introduced in Europe until $much_later... so. (And in any case, I wouldn't buy the console (and a tv, and the tv permit) just for it.)
I would definitely like to see more companies follow the same suit, though perhaps not as literally.
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 1058
Location: Reykjavík, Ísland
Warp wrote:
Basically they are absolutely and completely convinced of their atheistic views, and there's absolutely nothing you can do to make them listen to anything else. They might pretend to listen in a friendly and open way, but the underlying reason is always the same: They listen to your responses only to try to find flaws and counter-arguments to them, not because they are honestly interested in what you have to say nor open to alternative ideas.
Maybe it's because every argument has been refuted or nullified many times, and the current arguments are just variations on the old ones. It gets annoying after a time, you know. When you hear the same things over and over again, and you automatically punch holes in their arguments without even thinking about it anymore, it's hard to really listen. But here are things that would convince me, and every other thinking atheist in the world. Here's a nice video of youtube about what those things are:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rqUsC2KsiI
I would like to see a similar video about what would convince a religious person that they are wrong. Such a video will probably never get made, though. Warp, what you said is really the opposite of what's true.
why is it *always* christianity? have you ever seen such an atheist video which would attack buddhism, hare krishna or islam?
This guy frequently criticizes Islam. He does the same with Christianity, and in one video or so Judaism. His main focus remains Islam though, and he does actually receive death threats every now and then (from what I understand). Also the videos are probably extremely offensive to anyone who is a part of one of those religions.
Sorry for further derailing the thread.
and you automatically punch holes in their arguments without even thinking about it anymore
Since you didn't present an actual argument, I can't punch holes in it.
Blublu wrote:
But here are things that would convince me, and every other thinking atheist in the world. Here's a nice video of youtube about what those things are: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rqUsC2KsiI
This video was amusing to me.
Yeah, I suppose those would be the same questions I would ask if I was an atheist.
As a follower of God, instead, I can see why those questions are hardly being fulfilled. I have no doubt that God performs miracles, but the thing about miracles, including prayer answers, is that such answers are only granted when the desire for the request in the first place is initiated by God.[1] As for why does God not want to give a definite proof to those who choose not to believe, like he did with Eliyah and the prophets of Ba'al[2], I do not know. Maybe it has something to do with the freedom of choice issue I talked about in my post on the previous page, but this is merely guessing. God does give proofs from time to time (aside from that proof which he gives upon the conversion), but we must be awake and in the right place at the right time to notice them. (Matt. 7:6)
Any in any case, God does not desire just our believing in him. He desires that we accept him as our lord, so that we follow his will in a close communion with him and reject the sinful ways. Maybe he thinks that if his existence was a scientifically proven fact, it would be even more difficult to get people to actually convert to following him. But this is merely guessing.
Blublu wrote:
I would like to see a similar video about what would convince a religious person that they are wrong. Such a video will probably never get made, though.
Do you need a permit to have a tv? Or is that something else?
In Finland, if you possess a device capable of receiving television transmissions, you must pay a fee (about 200 euros per year), which covers the upkeeping of a few non-advertisement-paid national channels (even if you never watch those particular channels). (Similar fee exists in a few other countries, too. More about the concept at Wikipedia.)
Do you need a permit to have a tv? Or is that something else?
In Finland, if you possess a device capable of receiving television transmissions, you must pay a fee (about 200 euros per year), which covers the upkeeping of a few non-advertisement-paid national channels
Here in the great USA we prefer free TV and to pay hundreds of dollars a year for medical insurance that doesn't even cover the extraordinary cost of hospital visits :S Can I move to Finland?
Bisqwit, do you watch any TV series regularly despite not owning a TV (through downloading)?
If so, which are the most notable ones you are following?
I have followed (or sometimes, just downloaded for watching) these (inclusively):
-- Farscape, Enterprise, Battlestar Galactica, Stargate SG-1, Stargate Atlantis
-- Doctor Who, Torchwood, The Outer Limits, The 4400
-- Iron Chef, Mythbusters
-- And a number of Japanese anime series.
The currently active list is considerably shorter -- as I think quickly it only includes Naruto Shippūden.
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 1058
Location: Reykjavík, Ísland
Bisqwit wrote:
Blublu wrote:
and you automatically punch holes in their arguments without even thinking about it anymore
Since you didn't present an actual argument, I can't punch holes in it.
I occasionally discuss religion on the internet, but I try not to do it so much anymore. I still always do though, I just can't resist. But really, it's always just the same thing back and forth over and over again for all eternity. I've heard all the religious arguments before, and you're probably also heard all the atheist arguments before. None have convinced you, and also nothing has convinced me yet. Because to me, the religious arguments all have a rational explanation that doesn't invoke the supernatural, so why invoke the supernatural at all? But now I'm discussing religion again, so I better try and stop.
What doesn't make sense to me is that he says that God loves us and that he doesn't want anyone to go to hell, so why create hell in the first place? Or since God is all-powerful, why not just destroy it now?
His experience was probably real, but I don't think it was hell, at least not an eternal hell (since he already got back!). Most religions teach that there is a hell, but it's only the newer (Western) religions that say that it's eternal. The Bible sometimes describes hell as 'eternal', but it's worth noting that the Greek word aiônios was often used to mean an extremely long, but still limited period of time.
