REAL debate thread for RELIGION

[Rían]

Originally posted by Bombadillo
You mean the stories of Genesis, and how they excluded the dinosaurs and whatnot?

Does this mean that just because the story in Genesis never mentioned a leopard gecko, that the cute little leopard gecko in my son's room is an illusion? You've lost me with this one - I don't see your point.

[Rían]

Originally posted by Bombadillo
You mean how the creation stories don't include dinosaurs and things that have been already proven through science?

(see above post)

In that case, I'll inform you that Scientific Truth and Religious Truth are two entirely separate things, and not meant to be contrasted.
Scientific Truth relates to things that repeated physical tests have proven to be factually accurate.
Religious Truth means that one firmly believes in it, and therefore, to their own personal selves, it is a fact.

Woo boy, are YOU wrong, at least if you're trying to make a general statement about religious truth that includes me! If you ARE, then let me inform you that you may exclude me from your definition

It's obvious that there simply IS a truth about how the universe got here; would you agree? IOW, if there are two contradictory theories, ONLY ONE can be actually true; do you agree? For example, here are two options (of many) : (1) the God described in the Bible made things, (2) evolutionary processes made things. Now, both are unprovable by scientific means, and both have a starting point that is unexplained. (And btw, I agree with your definition of scientific truth, and I hope you have noticed that most of the theory of evolution CANNOT be scientifically proven ) So anyway, to make a very long story short, I believe that option 1 is the most likely to be true, based on analysis of what I see around me.

And as far as "religious truth" in general, to me, BY FAR the most sane option, and the one that jives with what I see around me daily and what I think and feel inside me, and how I see other people acting and hear them talking, is that Christianity is the true statement of the actual fact of how things are. I mean, things either ARE a fact or AREN'T : one can't MAKE them a fact because one closes their eyes and crosses their fingers and wishes reeeeely hard I think we all need to look around us, and think about things, and think about the ramifications of different ideas, and then choose a "worldview" that we think is the best reflection of the actual truth of the way things are.

Or if you were refering to the inconsistency in Genesis, it is simply because it wasn't meant to be taken literally. *expects a bashing already* But for proof, just read it! There are two creation stories, and they blatantly contradict each other.

um, "blatantly"? I don't see that. I agree that the two accounts have a different focus and point, though.

[Rían]

Originally posted by brownjenkins
i always found the general messiness of our existence to point more towards a lack of any great mind behind it... or at least a far from perfect one

I see the messiness as the result of a loving God that chose to give people the incredible gift of free will, instead of "forcing" them to love and obey Him, and the people chose to abuse that gift Now really, what percentage of the world's sorrows are DIRECTLY caused by people's free-will choice? Quite a large percentage, IMO.

[Nurvingiel]

I meant to note earlier that the only aspects of science that have been proven are laws, such as the law of gravity. There are very few laws, for good reason.
You can't prove evolution, nor can you prove that animals and people were created pretty much as you see them today. Both theories are valid and sensible. (Creationists may not like me calling it a theory, but I strongly believe it is a theory.)
All this came up in the Creationism thread, which I can't find for some reason.

[Rían]

Originally posted by Drgnslyer
One potential reason between the two different myths in Genesis could be attributed to the fact that the bible has been re-written numerous times....

Do you really mean "re-written", or do you mean "re-translated"? There's quite a difference Do you know any multi-lingual people, btw, or are you perhaps multi-lingual?

This is a fairly risque point, but jesus even said *I forget the exact words, i'll track it down and get the quote from the bible* that man should not worship god in a temple, that man should be able to simply worship god within himself...what exactly is a church...it's a christian temple....what did jesus say not to do....go to a temple to worship....

I know that what i've said here can be somewhat controvercial, but it's all fact, not asumption.

Well, considering that you got those quotes from the NT a bit wrong, I would say that it's NOT all fact But see if you can find them. And also, see if you can track down comparitive studies of ancient literature, too, and see how well the Bible fares.

[Bombadillo]

Originally posted by RÃ*an
Does this mean that just because the story in Genesis never mentioned a leopard gecko, that the cute little leopard gecko in my son's room is an illusion? You've lost me with this one - I don't see your point.

In that post, I was just asking MasterMothra to clarify what he was asking; I wasn't arguing anything at all. But no, that's not what it means... (explaination in rest of post v)

Originally posted by RÃ*an
(see above post)

Woo boy, are YOU wrong, at least if you're trying to make a general statement about religious truth that includes me! If you ARE, then let me inform you that you may exclude me from your definition

It's obvious that there simply IS a truth about how the universe got here; would you agree? IOW, if there are two contradictory theories, ONLY ONE can be actually true; do you agree? For example, here are two options (of many) : (1) the God described in the Bible made things, (2) evolutionary processes made things. Now, both are unprovable by scientific means, and both have a starting point that is unexplained. (And btw, I agree with your definition of scientific truth, and I hope you have noticed that most of the theory of evolution CANNOT be scientifically proven ) So anyway, to make a very long story short, I believe that option 1 is the most likely to be true, based on analysis of what I see around me.

And as far as "religious truth" in general, to me, BY FAR the most sane option, and the one that jives with what I see around me daily and what I think and feel inside me, and how I see other people acting and hear them talking, is that Christianity is the true statement of the actual fact of how things are. I mean, things either ARE a fact or AREN'T : one can't MAKE them a fact because one closes their eyes and crosses their fingers and wishes reeeeely hard I think we all need to look around us, and think about things, and think about the ramifications of different ideas, and then choose a "worldview" that we think is the best reflection of the actual truth of the way things are.

That wasn't my definition, because I took it from my notes from Scripture class. It's what the Catholic church believes. About the "scientific truth," I probably shouldn't have included the word "proved." But I think everyone can infer what that term would relate to: things and ideas that can be tested through science, even if you don't think it can be /proven/ through science. Such as: Water's volume is numerically equal to its mass, or rubber bounces. A religious truth would be: I love my mommy.

Both are true, but they're obviously true in different ways. They're separate then, one being science, and the other being spirit, but still both true. So it is perfectly fine, normal, and not even frowned upon for a Catholic to believe that the Universe was created by a gigantic explosion, but we also believe that God did it. So I think that the most logical thing to believe is that God caused an explosion.

[Nurvingiel]

Originally posted by RÃ*an
Do you really mean "re-written", or do you mean "re-translated"? There's quite a difference Do you know any multi-lingual people, btw, or are you perhaps multi-lingual?

Parts of the Bible were re-written (for example, the addition of the word "heretic"), and the entire Bible has been translated and re-translated.

This does not diminish the validity and importance of the Bible, but in my opinion, but this does mean that we can no longer take it literally.

Words also change their meanings over time. For example, "Virgin" used to mean "young girl" and now it refers to someone who's never had sex.

I am multilingual, I'm fluent in French and English. It is very difficult to translate some words, though the two languages are fairly close.
One of my best friends speaks Japanese and English, and she says many words cannot be translated properly.

[Bombadillo]

Yeah, if 'samurai' were translated, it would be 'sword true'.

Some things were lost in translation even from Hebrew to Latin. Joseph and Mary may not have even tried to to get a room at any inn in Bethlehem: the same word used for 'inn' was used for 'upper room', refering to an elevated platform above the animals in a barn. That in particular is irrelevant, but it's the first one I remembered off hand. The good part is, the clergy is aware of this and they make sure everything still makes sense.

[Drgnslyer]

One of my biggest things about religion goes beyond any faith's individual beliefs, and focuses on the entire pantheon of all religions.

Take a basic blueprint, you have one omnipresent figure, beyond comprehension.

Then you have a network of higher level entities, each with their own individual personality.

Below that you have a network of lower level entities, again, each wiht their own individual personality.

Every religion has this sort of structure....even pagan religions will all have a *god of gods* so to speak. Even Witchcraft recognizes that above the Goddess and the God there is simply "The One"...beyond our comprehension.

The next level would be your pantheon of gods....in christianity this would consist of the archangels, and quite possibly the entity of 'satan' as well.

The level below this would be the demi-gods so to speak....in christianity this would simply be regular angels...

Look at stories from religion to religion....in Sumeria, pre-babylon you will see the great flood story...and renditions of david and goliath...even the concept of the garden of eden...all this at 4-5000 BC....

In looking into the true source of religion, one has to remain openminded, for it's the close-minded individuals in religious structure that ends up declaring religious war, be it jihad or the crusades...such actions being an outright abomination of the true purpose of religion...

[brownjenkins]

Originally posted by RÃ*an
I see the messiness as the result of a loving God that chose to give people the incredible gift of free will, instead of "forcing" them to love and obey Him, and the people chose to abuse that gift Now really, what percentage of the world's sorrows are DIRECTLY caused by people's free-will choice? Quite a large percentage, IMO.

i was referring to more tangible things... why did god give us an appendix?

why do i have hair on my big toe?

does everything have a purpose... or did he get goofy and throw in a bunch of irrelavent stuff to throw us off?

that kinda stuff

[Nurvingiel]

I feel that the true purpose of religion is to organise spiritulality. IOW, the goal of religion is to organise people who share the same spiritual beliefs. Usually, the goal is positive, but its purpose could be organising people for a political war (like the Crusades).

[brownjenkins]

you should read this book if you haven't already Drgnslyer

power of myth

it's an excellent study of the evolution of religion over written history

on the science/religion thing... the main difference is that scientific theories can be tested, and in fact are meant to be

religious beliefs cannot be tested, and are intended to taken at face value

that is why science has theories and religion has beliefs

religious beliefs will always be religious beliefs... scientific theories, on the other hand, have the potential to be proven

for a long ime the earth was believed to be flat, observation later lead people to think that it was a globe... but this was still a theory until someone finally circumnavigated the earth... then it became fact

until god comes down for a visit... religion will always be a belief (and even then, i'll be looking for the little man behind the black curtain )

[Janny]

I thought the messiness being referred to was like 'Ahh, the cooking's boiling over and the phone's ringing' messiness.
Sure if you want to go out and study these thing then sure science will come up with a rational response and make the guy who hasn't researched look dumb.
But the world seems too quantifiable to be random.

[brownjenkins]

Originally posted by Janny
But the world seems too quantifiable to be random.

i'm not really saying random... more like "inefficient"

i guess it matters which creation myth you buy into... if you go for the "god started the universe and then let things alone" it is easy to see why things are the way they are... and under this belief, evolution could coexist with god

if you go by the "god made adam and eve 6000 years ago" or something similar, a lot more things don't make sense... why create stars and planets millions of light years distant?

[Rían]

*Is still waiting to find out what the problem was about dinosaurs *

[Rían]

Originally posted by Drgnslyer
One of my biggest things about religion goes beyond any faith's individual beliefs, and focuses on the entire pantheon of all religions.

But how do you reconcile things when two beliefs have directly contradictory statements?

In looking into the true source of religion, one has to remain openminded, for it's the close-minded individuals in religious structure that ends up declaring religious war, be it jihad or the crusades...such actions being an outright abomination of the true purpose of religion...

What's the true purpose of religion, in your opinion?

[Valandil]

Originally posted by brownjenkins
... why did god give us an appendix?

That we might have *Appendix Trivia*!!!

why do i have hair on my big toe?

Part hobbit?

Sorry... in quite the goofy mood! If I were to get serious, I'd say, "I don't know."

[Rían]

Originally posted by brownjenkins
if you go by the "god made adam and eve 6000 years ago" or something similar, a lot more things don't make sense... why create stars and planets millions of light years distant?

You've read the Sil and you would ask this?!

Three reasons off the top of my head:

First, because they're darn beautiful and are a stunning testimony to the glory of God; second, because we have an explorer's soul within us and there's something lovely about the remoteness of some things; third, because we need to know that not all things are under our control or ever could be.

Whatcha think of those, bucko?


(ps - you need a custom title! Have you thought of any?)

[Rían]

Originally posted by brownjenkins
i was referring to more tangible things... why did god give us an appendix?

why do i have hair on my big toe?

does everything have a purpose... or did he get goofy and throw in a bunch of irrelavent stuff to throw us off?

that kinda stuff [/B]

Appendix - I don't know, but it's sure fun to try to find out, and we learn lots of things while we're doing it! And it may have had a purpose many thousands of years ago but is not needed now.

Toe - Ewwww! How much? I would say to give you something to think about when you're trying to avoid something else you should be doing. Or something for your wife to play with.

Personally, I think that God has a great sense of humor. Really now, reread some of those illustrations that Jesus gave - we're so used to reading the Bible in a somber voice that we lose the humor! Altho Jesus was mainly serious, because he had the most important task in the world to accomplish - but yet, the humor comes through.

God's pulled some good ones on me, and I can almost hear him laugh sometimes! And I can almost hear Him laugh out of sheer joy sometimes when I look at certain things in nature, and I laugh along with Him. I think you're right - He got "goofy" and threw in a bunch of irrelevant stuff to keep us from getting too self-absorbed and self-satisfied - basically, to keep us on our toes, and on the lookout for Him.

[Ruinel]

Originally posted by RÃ*an
Does this mean that just because the story in Genesis never mentioned a leopard gecko, that the cute little leopard gecko in my son's room is an illusion? You've lost me with this one - I don't see your point.

I think what Bombadillo was trying to ask, had to do with not only an omission of these animals from the story but also a lack of physical evidence outside the tale which would indicate that neither homosapiens, nor their evolutionary predecessors, appear at the same time as dinosaurs.

Does anyone have any other creation stories they can share? I'm always up for some fiction.