It would make some sense for the Empire to go cheap on a huge project like the Death Star and could probably save them billions of credits in the end, but you would think the doors would at least be heavy enough to go straight up and down!
The Clone Wars series for one. There is so much about it I like, but it has so many problems and inconsistencies with the movies as well.
It still wobbles very definitely.
Jaitea said:
So that fits in with your understanding of god, the dinosaurs time on earth at being 165 million years and our species barely on this planet?
It fits perfectly well with my understanding of God.
All those creatures and species living their lives to evolve just for our benefit? just so we can spend a small time on earth so god can decide if we deserve to go to the afterlife?
J
Partially. I don't know that I would put it that way though. The way you phrased it may not be indicative of the true purpose of it all, but the gist of what you are saying/questioning is correct.
Jaitea said:
RicOlie_2 said:
Jaitea said:
RicOlie_2 said:
Jaitea said:
Do you think you would be that religion if you were born in another country, say India or Afghanistan?
Depends where. There are a lot of Catholics in India. Of course I could have been born into a different religion, in which case I would probably still belong to that religion. I would be an entirely different person had I been born somewhere else and I cannot therefore speculate as to whether or not I would have stuck with it.
So probably you would be worshiping a different God with the same enthusiasm,....so really you are a Catholic because of your parents, if you were born in D_E's family you would be a Mormon etc
Thats the way it usually goes, the world over....would you find it unimaginable to switch to another religion?
Not unimaginable, no. Difficult perhaps, but as I said, I don't know how I would behave because I would be a completely different person. If I were the same person and thought the same way for the most part, except for my religious beliefs, I would not likely continue to adhere to those religious beliefs. But of course I would not think the same way.
another question,.....it's fair to believe in evolution now?
J
I believe in guided evolution (evolution with God guiding it along).
Ok it's established that the universe is 13.8 billion years old.....the age of the earth is 4.6 billion years old...first life on earth estimated 3.8 billion years ago.....dinosaurs first appeared about 230 million years ago.....mammals first appeared 160 million years ago, but lived under the shadow of the dominant reptiles until 65 million years ago when an asteroid/comet hit near Mexico.....only 200,000 years ago the first homo sapiens appeared....
....up to 5 billion species have gone by the wayside and are extinct due to evolution.....all that to evolve gods perfect creation.....man
Created to worship Him
Why not? Look at all the complexity of the universe. God could have just made it as it is, but he developed it slowly instead, but why is that a problem?
Sorry if this sounds like superior intellect.....its not.....it's from Google
Enjoy your time on earth
J
It doesn't sound like superior intellect. All those are facts I know myself. I plan to enjoy my time on earth if God wills it, but I would rather enjoy the other side of death than enjoy my time on this side.
No, it is definitely not a jump cut. The actors beside the door don't move an inch, but the door wobbles like crazy and must go back and forth a couple inches horizontally as it comes down. It looks pretty bad anyway.
Jaitea said:
RicOlie_2 said:
As you said, perhaps alcohol made you come across the wrong way, but you heavily implied that religion will go extinct relatively soon and that it has been the cause of most suffering.
I do feel with the advances in space exploration and the understanding of the cosmos we are on the verge of truly discovering the origins of life.....look where we were 50 years ago
That would be interesting, but I don't believe the discovery of the origins of life would preclude the existence of God or a god.
RicOlie_2 said:
Jaitea said:
I have never been rude to you or Ric2, I've just asked questions that (i think) are loopholes in your faith....to make you question.....I don't think you are foolish, or that I am wise, some times when you are so close to something, you don't see what it looks like as others see it from afar
J
You sometimes came across as one of those "superior intellect" types, and though I was never really offended, some (most of your comments were polite) comments seemed slightly rude or patronizing.
I'm sorry if I came across that way,.....it must be the way I type:)
J
No worries. :)
Never mind.
Jaitea said:
RicOlie_2 said:
Jaitea said:
Do you think you would be that religion if you were born in another country, say India or Afghanistan?
Depends where. There are a lot of Catholics in India. Of course I could have been born into a different religion, in which case I would probably still belong to that religion. I would be an entirely different person had I been born somewhere else and I cannot therefore speculate as to whether or not I would have stuck with it.
So probably you would be worshiping a different God with the same enthusiasm,....so really you are a Catholic because of your parents, if you were born in D_E's family you would be a Mormon etc
Thats the way it usually goes, the world over....would you find it unimaginable to switch to another religion?
Not unimaginable, no. Difficult perhaps, but as I said, I don't know how I would behave because I would be a completely different person. If I were the same person and thought the same way for the most part, except for my religious beliefs, I would not likely continue to adhere to those religious beliefs. But of course I would not think the same way.
another question,.....it's fair to believe in evolution now?
J
I believe in guided evolution (evolution with God guiding it along).
To clarify I meant immediate family, immediate family including children, parents, siblings, and spouses.
If your biological siblings and parents, or wife/husband and biological children outnumber mine, I shall be sufficiently impressed.
@ Warb
The second link in my last post is to that article.
I may be wrong about him not being a Christian, but that is the impression I got when I read it the first time.
Bodies that are preserved after death without embalming or mummification, et al.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incorruptibility
http://www.howstuffworks.com/incorruptible.htm
I see that Warbler wishes that we never mind his comment, but I'll leave the links up for those who have Googlitophobia.
That is an interesting article. I read another article earlier today which directly contradicts the one you linked to (it was not from a Catholic or even Christian viewpoint, BTW).
As I have no direct experience with incorruptibles, I don't know what to believe.
Everyone counts. ;)
One reason I made the thread is because I'm curious to see if anyone on this forum has a larger family than I do.
EDIT: That sounds a bit childish, but I'm often interested in people's family sizes, because it often says quite a bit about a person. I was also somewhat curious to see if there were people here who objected to large families, as I have seen elsewhere on the internet. It's surprising the negative view people have about families with more than three or four kids and the lectures they give about overpopulation, good childhoods, etc.
The first time I watched ESB I thought Luke actually killed Darth Vader in the cave scene and that was really his face in the helmet (it didn't look like Luke to me), so I was confused when he reappeared later in the movie.
Another one (really crazy, I know) was that I was under the impression that the prequels were better than the boring original trilogy with too much talking and really slow sabre fights. The PT was my first taste of Star Wars unfortunately and back then I liked movies for their special effects, not their story. Now that I'm fourteen I know better. ;)
To my credit, I never understood Jar Jar and I thought he was retarded (I still thought he was funny at times though).
EDIT: Is anyone on this forum younger than me? I feel like a little kid compared to all you old people. ;)
TV's Frink said:
RicOlie_2 said:
No Frink, you're mixing up people and their beliefs/actions again. :P
I think agnosticism is better than atheism.
My beliefs are better than their beliefs. Woo-hoo!
No, your unbeliefs are better than their unbeliefs. ;)
Leonardo said:
RicOlie_2 said:
and atheism doesn't explain so many things (science may one day, but I doubt it)
[arche?]
I am not referring to the Arche or anything else which will likely remain a mystery forever, but rather I am referring to so-called supernatural experiences (which I naturally do believe are supernatural for the most part) and miracles.
Sorry, science has already debunked all of them as hoaxes or mass hysteria. So called pre-mortem experiences have already been reproduced outside of life-threatening situations, with the use of drugs. If there are scientists who say "it's a miracle", they're theists.
I am curious as to what the scientific explanation for incorruptibles is. As far as I am aware, there isn't one, but if you can prove me wrong, go for it.
Warbler said:
RicOlie_2 said:
Islam: Despite what many insist, Islam is certainly not a religion of peace and this is apparent from the Qur'an. I believe in peace (though I think war is necessary sometimes), thus I cannot maintain the ideals of this religion.
what about the all the Muslims that do live peacefully?
They live peacefully, but the Qur'an doesn't tell them they should be living that way.
Muslim Apologists Explain That So-Called Radical Beliefs Aren't Radical According to the Qur'an
These videos explain that fact. A lot of Muslims may be peaceful people, but their religion isn't.
Warbler said:
RicOlie_2 said:
My reasons for not believing the following religions:
Protestantism: I don't believe in Sola Scriptura (Scripture Alone) because that makes little sense seeing as (a) it doesn't say that that ought to be the case anywhere in the Bible, in fact in 2 Thessalonians 2:15 it says that tradition is to be valued as well; (b) the books of the New Testament were not all completed until at least the end of the first century, were not compiled until the fourth century, and were not made readily available until the fifteenth century when the printing press was invented; and (c) I think the Church should be unified as suggested in the New Testament, which would be impossible with private interpretation (there are 41,000 Christian denominations!). I don't believe in Sola Fides (Faith Alone...I'm not sure if I got the Latin right) because again, that cannot result in unity which I believe is important. I have other reasons as well, but I don't have time to go into depth right now.
Mormonism: The lack of archaeological evidence of the events found in the Book of Mormon is suspicious, but otherwise, I have a lot of respect for Mormons and their religion and those I have met (including d_e ;) ) have given me a good impression of them overall. The polygamous Mormon sects are a different case though.
Judaism: This one is fairly obvious. I obviously believe the Messiah has already come and believe he dispensed with the fine details of the Mosaic Law and gave the next step up.
Islam: Despite what many insist, Islam is certainly not a religion of peace and this is apparent from the Qur'an. I believe in peace (though I think war is necessary sometimes), thus I cannot maintain the ideals of this religion.
Hinduism: I'm not going to even bother explaining. The same goes for the ancient Greek, Babylonian, Roman, Egyptian, etc. gods and mythology.
Atheism: The relative subjectivity of atheist's morals doesn't attract me very much. I believe that right and wrong are fixed and do not evolve over time. Atheists believe so many different things and my reasons may not apply to all of them, but I am also opposed to moral subjectivity because of all the potential problems that can spring from it; the certainty of the nonexistence of any god seems no more reasonable than the belief in such a god and atheism doesn't explain so many things (science may one day, but I doubt it); atheists (this is not necessarily a problem with atheism itself) frequently try to impose their "superior intellect" on us primitive religious, a trait I find greatly detracts from their cause, as I think humility is a great virtue that would solve so many problems if more people possessed it; and I cannot agree with the ideals and ideas held by many atheists since they conflict with many ideals and ideas that are positive and beneficial in my personal experience and examples throughout history.
Agnosticism: Not much to say about this one. Similar to atheism, but not as bad.
Buddhism? Sikhism?
I haven't done much research on these religions, and I rarely come across Buddhists and Sikhs, so I have had less reason to learn about their religions than I have had to learn about religions like Islam and Mormonism. I plan to read up on these and other religions in the near future, but my interest in religions other than my own is a recent one.
Having said that, I do have another religion to add to my list:
Baha'i: This seems like too much of a compromise to unify everybody to me. The ideals of its prophets seem to go back and forth and contradict each other. Assuming I understand its beliefs correctly, I don't think it is possible. Mohammed was against Christianity, but the Baha'i religion accepts both Christ and Mohammed as prophets proclaiming the truth.
Jaitea said:
darth_ender said:
Your comment did not offend. I do, however, feel this thread (as well as the Catholic thread) have become far more like "Reform the foolish believer" threads rather than engaging in understanding why we believe what we believe. I don't mind that sort of discussion, but it would probably be better in its own thread, where the OP doesn't feel compelled to defend religion on his own. You don't have to believe in God, but I assure you that 50 years down the road, people still will. Instead of dwelling on what damage this world may have seen from religion, look at the good it has provided. Most great discoveries have been performed by religious believers. The freedoms enjoyed by this world's greatest nations have been founded by believers. It can be used for ill, but so can the lack of religion. If you truly subscribe to the belief that religion is the reason for most suffering on earth, then I encourage you to think things through a little more, my friend.
I think I'll start a new thread soon.
I don't think I have ever said that I viewed that most suffering on earth to be the result of religion and I don't think you need to patronise me by advising me to think things through.
As you said, perhaps alcohol made you come across the wrong way, but you heavily implied that religion will go extinct relatively soon and that it has been the cause of most suffering.
I have never been rude to you or Ric2, I've just asked questions that (i think) are loopholes in your faith....to make you question.....I don't think you are foolish, or that I am wise, some times when you are so close to something, you don't see what it looks like as others see it from afar
J
You sometimes came across as one of those "superior intellect" types, and though I was never really offended, some (most of your comments were polite) comments seemed slightly rude or patronizing.
Jaitea said:
Hey guys this is a great thread!
A question to all, you are very clearly very happy with your religion, what religion are your parents?
My parents were both born and raised Catholics. My mother remains such, but my father is now agnostic.
What made you pick the religion that you think is better than all the others?
I gave a brief answer to this in the second post of this thread.
Do you think you would be that religion if you were born in another country, say India or Afghanistan?
Depends where. There are a lot of Catholics in India. Of course I could have been born into a different religion, in which case I would probably still belong to that religion. I would be an entirely different person had I been born somewhere else and I cannot therefore speculate as to whether or not I would have stuck with it.
......and a thing to remember, atheism isn't a religion, it's not believing in a deity.
Off is not a TV channel
J
Again, that was just an oversight. I do recognize the distinction.
Leonardo said:
RicOlie_2 said:
My reasons for not believing the following religions:
[...]
Atheism:
What Jaiteia said, if you make a list and write "religions", atheism doesn't belong there. But I'm sure this is merely an oversight.
Yes, that was merely an oversight. I was writing in the wee hours of the morning and wasn't at my sharpest. What I should have written was "My reasons for not placing my belief/unbelief in the following".
The relative subjectivity of atheist's morals doesn't attract me very much. I believe that right and wrong are fixed and do not evolve over time. Atheists believe so many different things and my reasons may not apply to all of them, but I am also opposed to moral subjectivity because of all the potential problems that can spring from it;
You say that like there's a 50/50 chance that an individual without the moral compass of the bible might turn out a criminal. In reality most people have what's called common sense, and don't steal or kill or [insert dangerous act] because 1) they're worried about the consequences (pissing someone off) and 2) it would be a dick thing to do. What we really have is a much higher percentage of people that act like behaved citizens and don't steal their neighbours' car etc, and another percentage of people we call "criminals" that clearly do not understand the consequences of their actions. And let me remind you again, that in the real world not all of these criminals are atheists.
Once again I attribute my lack of clarity to my lack of sleep. :)
What I meant is that I disagree with those atheists (it is an atheist and perhaps agnostic viewpoint, though not all--and maybe only the minority--hold it) who believe that morals evolve over time. I believe they are fixed from the beginning. Those who believe in moral subjectivity don't believe that there is such thing as right and wrong. I am aware that this doesn't mean that they can't distinguish between the two, but they deny its existence.
In case I didn't make it any clearer, I am not of the opinion that atheists have no concept of right and wrong at all, but I am condemning moral subjectivity or evolution.
the certainty of the nonexistence of any god seems no more reasonable than the belief in such a god
I beg to differ. It may seem unreasonable to you, because you come from the postulate "there is a god". But I assure you, it is not unreasonable. And I do understand the merits and reasons of theism.
Again, my choice of words was perhaps unclear. I don't mean that atheism is less reasonable, but just that it is not more reasonable. I don't necessarily believe that it is any less resonable either.
and atheism doesn't explain so many things (science may one day, but I doubt it)
If you're talking about the Arche, then neither science nor atheism are supposed to explain that (even though science started out that way). It's interesting to think that we could find a first cause, and it would sound like common sense that it should be an entity, and individual. Just like when we're children we ask "why is the sky blue?", the quest for knowledge is an enchanting and elightening one. But some questions may be wrong in the first place. And by wrong I mean "syntax error" kind of wrong. We look at the origin of the cosmos and ask "Who?". Maybe we're asking the wrong question.
I am not referring to the Arche or anything else which will likely remain a mystery forever, but rather I am referring to so-called supernatural experiences (which I naturally do believe are supernatural for the most part) and miracles.
As someone who does not need theism, I don't feel like I'm using "my superior intellect versus a primitive mind" cause I'll be the first to admit, I am a moron. I'll just say, try to look beyond your postulates. It ain't so bad.
I'm glad you're not one to pull the superior intellect card, as I find that greatly detracts from a person's character. I find that my religion gives more answers than questions, so I stick with it and nothing yet has given me reason to believe that it is false.
No Frink, you're mixing up people and their beliefs/actions again. :P
I think agnosticism is better than atheism.
Well, it was nice to advance the game a few moves. I'd better call it a night, but I'm looking forward to continuing tomorrow later today. ;)
259
Come on Frink, you only have four days left!