My view on religion.

[Hitto]

I'm sorry, but I disagree :

"Honestly, if someone can't understand that by definition of the concept, God precedes all else, such a person doesn't have the mind to be a scientist. Grasping basic thought concepts is essential to most scientific endeavors."

You're basing this argument on a man-made definition. Man defines g.d, thus Man INVENTS g.d. Then, Man mocks scientists who bear the burden of proof, while the guru doesn't. It's unfair. And, it's considered blasphemy.

 

[spokenrope]

Eh wow.
This shit is still continuing. Surprised that a mod hasn't shut this down yet... Though I must give kudos to everyone for SEEMING to remain civil...


Precisely, we only SEEM to be civil. In actuality, we are behaving like savage... monkeys.

Proof that we all evolved from monkeys. Just like your avatar illustrates.

Overall, I think that we're doing a good job remaining civil to each other in this thread. I didn't get to read any of the posts that have gotten deleted, but it seems that we're just debating points without resorting to ad hominem attacks.

 

[lastdual]

Honestly, if someone can't understand that by definition of the concept, God precedes all else, such a person doesn't have the mind to be a scientist. Grasping basic thought concepts is essential to most scientific endeavors.


looks like your just side stepping questions and arguments by declaring god above question or thought, seems to be a common theme in this thread.


Good morning

I wasn't "side-stepping" any questions, I was just pointing out that the question itself was logically flawed. Instead of "God", let's take the concept of "beginning". Would a scientist be intelligent who asks "what came before the beginning of everything?"

By definition, "the beginning of everything" would have to come before anything else. Therefore, to ask what came before it is absurd. If something came before it, then it must not have been the "beginning of everything". Likewise, if something preceded and/or created "God", then the being in question does not fit the western definition of "God" in the first place.

Hitto

You're basing this argument on a man-made definition. Man defines g.d, thus Man INVENTS g.d. Then, Man mocks scientists who bear the burden of proof, while the guru doesn't. It's unfair. And, it's considered blasphemy.

Hitto, ALL arguments are based on man-made definitions. All language is based on man-made definitions. Language is the structured defining of ideas into a communicable medium (words).

However, just because man defines a concept into words, does not mean that the concept itself does not exist apart from man. And please, no one here is attacking any scientists for blasphemy... Scientific thought and religious thought are not mutually exclusive.

 

[mthrnite]

Be with you guys in a minute...

.. just gotta finish this level.

 

[imgod22222]

Hmm... returning quickly to the paper mario theory (which i do agree can be easily vaild)

1) Why must God exist in a dimension above our own? Since planes technically have no depth, God can exist in the first dimesion where no one can see him
2) If god is 3d and we are 2d (a similar analogy), then when he crosses our plane can be explained in the wierd things that happen (not like a 7 yr old grilled cheese sandwich bearing a resemblance to jesus, but like a statue of the virigin mary crying, since that is truely a miracle (defies most science, not a strange coincidence like cheese-mold))

but that's trying to define God, which is impossible, if not blasphemy.
However, trying to define religion is something different, which often leads to flaming.

Oh yeah, and earlier in this thread (i think page 11) a practicer of the Muslim religion complained about Christians coming to their door. I want to know: Were they really Christians or Jehovah's Witnesses? Jehovah's Witnesses believe that the rapture will happen at any time, and they want to save people, and the only way to do that according to their religion is to be a Jehovah's Witness, and people who don't convert are evil because they are denying God (in the eyes of a Jehovah Witness).

 

[Sinkhead]

- Sam

 

[Azimuth]

Good morning

I wasn't "side-stepping" any questions, I was just pointing out that the question itself was logically flawed. Instead of "God", let's take the concept of "beginning". Would a scientist be intelligent who asks "what came before the beginning of everything?"

By definition, "the beginning of everything" would have to come before anything else. Therefore, to ask what came before it is absurd. If something came before it, then it must not have been the "beginning of everything". Likewise, if something preceded and/or created "God", then the being in question does not fit the western definition of "God" in the first place.

the question isn't the beginning, its obvious that there was a beginning otherwise we wouldn't be here

. What I have a problem with is believing the "beginning" actually bears thought and is highly directed in how it chose to create itself and the world. If something came before the beginning then it is the beginning. But now we are just getting into meaningless loops of philosophy and semantics.

 

[Sneakz]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-811321280634119479

Check it out, If you seriously want proof that God is real, and your not posting here as some kind of joke, watch this video starting from 3:42

Its a Islamic Leader addressing Atheism and what ways to convert them, he starts by congratulating Atheist because they are actually thinking besides blindly following the religion of their parents, and he shows why thats the first step into becoming a muslim.

Excuse his harsh accent, But you'll get his point and he backs it up with proof from where he gets it from in the Quran .

This vid DIRECTLY ADDRESS ATHEIST AS IF HE WAS TALKING TO SOMEONE INFRONT OF THEM (Hes doing a presentation somewhere but thats not important)


( If the link doesn't work google search Atheists must watch this video from 3:42. Amazing Zakir Naik on Atheism, Atheist)

I really hope EVERYONE here watches the video, its only 15mins long minus the first 3mins, the first 3mins addresses a previous question)

 

[Bowser128]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-811321280634119479

Check it out, If you seriously want proof that God is real, and your not posting here as some kind of joke, watch this video

The first thing I have a problem with in your post is the fact that you seem to be suggesting that atheists are only posting here to 'find out' God is real, which is a tad insulting.

The second thing I have a problem with is the video, so the guy knows how to impress a Muslim audience, that doesn't mean he's presenting anything compelling to a non-Muslim. One of the many things that irked me was his stating an 'urban myth' as if it were truth. To say that everyone before the 16th century believed the earth was flat is just a lie, the Ancient Greeks even wrote about the 'spherical' nature of the earth, which far pre-dates Sir Francis Drake and Islam if I'm not very much mistaken.

I consider myself unconverted (anyone who lies to get their point across is not worth listening to).

Edited for the guy below me: Only a few writers ever wrote about the world being flat, the majority believed it was round.

 

[Bowser128]

Anyways, yes, Islam and Ancient Greece already knew that the Earth was spherical. But that's the minority. Proof:

"...Following Washington Irving's myth-filled 1828 biography of Columbus, Americans commonly believed Columbus had difficulty obtaining support for his plan because Europeans thought the Earth was flat..."

- SOURCE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Columbus


Also before the 16th century:

"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isidore_of_Seville"

The above guy invented the T and O flat map of Earth. So therefore, before the 1600s, many people thought of Earth as being flat. Please, get your facts straight plx.


Excuse me, but if you're going to quote a source, don't remove the context and do it in a misleading manner.

Following Washington Irving's myth-filled 1828 biography of Columbus, Americans commonly believed Columbus had difficulty obtaining support for his plan because Europeans thought the Earth was flat.[2] In fact, few at the time of Columbus’s voyage, and virtually no sailors or navigators, believed this.[3] Most agreed Earth was a sphere. This had been the general opinion of ancient Greek science, and continued as the standard opinion (for example of Bede in The Reckoning of Time) until Isidore of Seville misread the classical authors and stated the Earth was flat, inventing the T and O map concept. This view was very influential, but never wholly accepted.

Just because one Archbishop misinterpreted the facts doesn't mean the majority did.

To quote myselfQUOTE(Bowser128 @ Apr 19 2007, 10:54 PM)anyone who lies to get their point across is not worth listening to

it seems that that applies to you too.

 

[skullstatue]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-811321280634119479

Check it out, If you seriously want proof that God is real, and your not posting here as some kind of joke, watch this video starting from 3:42

Its a Islamic Leader addressing Atheism and what ways to convert them, he starts by congratulating Atheist because they are actually thinking besides blindly following the religion of their parents, and he shows why thats the first step into becoming a muslim.

Excuse his harsh accent, But you'll get his point and he backs it up with proof from where he gets it from in the Quran .

This vid DIRECTLY ADDRESS ATHEIST AS IF HE WAS TALKING TO SOMEONE INFRONT OF THEM (Hes doing a presentation somewhere but thats not important)


( If the link doesn't work google search Atheists must watch this video from 3:42. Amazing Zakir Naik on Atheism, Atheist)

I really hope EVERYONE here watches the video, its only 15mins long minus the first 3mins, the first 3mins addresses a previous question)


Zakir Naik is a wise man.

Anyways, yes, Islam and Ancient Greece already knew that the Earth was spherical. But that's the minority. Proof:

"...Following Washington Irving's myth-filled 1828 biography of Columbus, Americans commonly believed Columbus had difficulty obtaining support for his plan because Europeans thought the Earth was flat..."

- SOURCE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Columbus


Also before the 16th century:

"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isidore_of_Seville"

The above guy invented the T and O flat map of Earth. So therefore, before the 1600s, many people thought of Earth as being flat. Please, get your facts straight plx.

Sorry for nitpicking.

Also, too lazy to quote the first quote, but Hinduism is just the truth of the world. They believe that whatever path you choose (they believe that all religions are right) you will eventually find moksha, or eternal bliss. So thread creator, you're wrong lol.

Besides nitpicking little details, religion is a thing some people get, and some people don't. It's a fact of life.
In the end, no one gives a shit about your opinion, so STFU and upload Pokemon Diamond and Pearl already. For fucks sakes!

Google Piri Reis Map.

 

[Sneakz]

Sorry really to lazy to verify your references, but we ALL know wikipedia has the most accurate info

, none the less they were MANY points Zakir Naik raised and just cause (If your info is true) ONE of those points are umm wavy (for lack of a better word, I know there is one its on the tip of my tongue) DOESN'T MEAN HIS ENTIRE MESSAGE IS FLAWED, he proves that things that we just recently discovered (such as the sun rotating) WAS KNOWN 1400 YEARS AGO, How is this possible? THERES NO WAY the could have figured this out on their own with there technology, raises a lot of questions, no?

Yah I know you said excuse me for nit picking but really I had to.

 

[Sneakz]

Also sort of lost but it seems that your arguing people thought the world was flat "Even so, there is still proof before the 16th century era, that many people believed the world was flat. "

Are you trying to say that no one read, or took the Quran seriously at the time? Cause thats not the point. 1400 years ago It was written in the Quran that the world was spherical (Like the shape of an ostrich egg to quote the Quran) Even though there was no means of figuring this out at the time...


Also to any who missed it WATCH THIS VIDEO ITS A REALLY GOOD VID ON RELIGION
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-811321280634119479

Please do, It will make you think twice before you post, really.

 

[Azimuth]

Also sort of lost but it seems that your arguing people thought the world was flat "Even so, there is still proof before the 16th century era, that many people believed the world was flat. "

Are you trying to say that no one read, or took the Quran seriously at the time? Cause thats not the point. 1400 years ago It was written in the Quran that the world was spherical (Like the shape of an ostrich egg to quote the Quran) Even though there was no means of figuring this out at the time...


Also to any who missed it WATCH THIS VIDEO ITS A REALLY GOOD VID ON RELIGION
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-811321280634119479

Please do, It will make you think twice before you post, really.

are you a muslim? if you are then read the kafirun surah and keep quiet

Your posts are very immature, stop double posting, capitalizing and attacking people. We get it, you think god is great, if you can't argue in a civil manner don't argue at all.

You also realize that the quran is written in poetry right, and that poetry is hard to fully comprehend, this Zakir Naik is one voice among millions.

Maybe read the quran in its original context(arabic) and make up your mind, rather than blindly following the words of one man.

also id like the surah and line about the earth being spherical to verify your claims

 

[mthrnite]

I grow weary of this thread...
.. you cats need to find a bar.


.. a juice bar even.

Locking down in the next couple of pages, so try real hard to sum it up, k?


Massive respect to all you guys for having the intestinal fortitude to bash your heads against this brickiest of brick walls.

mthr

edit: if you reaaaally think I'm being too hasty let me know.

 

[Sneakz]

... sigh, I was hoping that maybe your views would change after watching the video but It really doesn't seem to effect your belief in nothing.

Zakir Naik backs up all his points with the exact iyah (I think thats how you right the Arabic in English) he gets it from, I cant recall it right now but If you watch the video again pay attention to what chapter and verse number he gives you

If you want to insult me for my 1 double post or capitals go ahead but really just respond to the video its a lot easier for me ok?

Also I do know how to read Arabic (I use to go to Dugsi, I really should start going again) but no I don't understand anything I'm reading at all so of course I would need an English version of the Quran or someone to interpret it, and as long as a speaker gives you the verse and chapter he gets it from (and you should verify this but I'm just taking his word for it because what reason would he have to lie to the crowd) Its valid and shouldn't be questioned from then on or else you would be saying the Quran is wrong.

You being x-Muslim should know what I mean by this have obviously memorized a couple of chapters from the Quran yourself.


Also to the Mod, lock the topic when you see It's not going anywhere or If people just constantly insult each other. then Ill hit a bar.

Wa Alaikum Assalam Shiro786

 

[Bowser128]

Locking down in the next couple of pages, so try real hard to sum it up, k?
mthr

By all means, end the thread if you want, but I think this particular debate isn't one that will be forever solved by a few members of GBATemp.

I grow weary of this thread...
.. you cats need to find a bar.


.. a juice bar even.

Is there one at the hotel?

 

[jtroye32]

I believe in the theory of intelligent design. it supports the theories of religous gods but doesn't at all imply that all powerful gods were the intelligence behind everything/anything

 

[Parsaw]

My religion is candy.

 

[jtroye32]

it pretty much says humans and everthing else are too advanced and complex to have become out of random happening such as natural selection and processes such as evolution.

an analogy would be spilling ink onto a piece of paper and using a fountain pen to write something. out of the almost infinite possibilities of ink to paper one would conclude that there was some kind of intelligence behind the writing rather than a random spilling of ink.