random thought by 1kiki

Riona: >_>

"Pure" is not an specific adjective. Similar genetics, however, are actually more dangerous inbreeding-wise than non-similar genetics, which is why incest has become so taboo.

You would be better arguing that Adam and Eve were in fact gestalt beings with all the representative human genetics (or precursors of such), or perhaps that in the form Adam and Eve occurred in, there were not dangerous hybridization mutations that could exist, and such mutations arose later.

The good news is that for certain definitions of "pure" you could say that's what you meant all along.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 4:45 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

An interesting theory, re RWA evidence vs. belief. But I think it may be looking for THE defining characteristic of a thing which has more than one defining characteristic.

I had a few rainbow moments.

One involved actual rainbows. I briefly concluded that it must never have rained before the flood, and then discarded the whole rainbow covenant thing as preposterous.

There were some other disturbing bits about offering daughters for rape to preserve houseguests, or ordering 'the chosen' to go and murder the non-chosen, women and children and babes and all.

It quickly became apparent to me that God was very inconsistent in his instructions of how to behave and treat people.

And then it occurred to me that Man was very inconsistent in his perceptions of God and communication of God's desires.

I lost faith in the total veracity of the Bible, but I still believe in God.

--Anthony

Note to Self:
Raptor - woman testifying about birth control is a slut (the term applies.)
Six - Wow, isn't Niki quite the CUNT? And, yes, I spell that in all caps....
Wulf - Niki is a stupid fucking bitch who should hurry up and die.

“The stupid neither forgive nor forget; the naive forgive and forget; the wise forgive but do not forget.” -Thomas Szasz

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 4:48 PM

We'll have to call Noah's Ark early quantum state phenomenon. :) /River

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 4:57 PM

Off Topic.

Oonj: "I haven't known a lot of dedicated, screaming Atheists,"

Byte: "(Still can't tell if Oonj is directing that at me)"

Riona: "Byte for example is a respectable Atheist,"

Oonj, gears grinding, -{Byte's an atheist?}-

I'd probably met several people, now long forgotten, who
expressed to me the ideas that religion is a crock & those
who believe in God-church-Bible-afterlife are weak, need
a crutch.

The particular Atheist who inspired my rant above is a guy
I met in about 1986. The last time I saw him was 2001 give
or take 2 years. By that time, I wanted nothing to do with
him.

Nevertheless, about 2 years ago, I became inspired to look
him up on the the 'Net, perhaps one of those days when,
bein' old, I wondered whatever happened to everyone.

Much to my surprise, his name came right up in a police
story. He is the prime suspect in the disappearance of a
teen-aged girl some 30-odd years ago.

My conclusion: Well, he never respected himself nor anyone
else. And bright as he was in science & tech, he had no mind
for Wisdom, & was about 0 on the Common Sense scale.

The best kind of smarts will let me live well, with or without
religion.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 5:00 PM

Beir bua agus beannacht

Byte, that's what I meant by "pure" as in none of that crap we all have in our gene pools today, as in everything works right, no one has sz or epilepsy or deformities etc. that's what I meant by pure.

Kiki, why do I have to fudge with backstory (?) in order to believe something. If something doesn't make sense I think about it and try to logic out what could be going on to explain it, if that's fudging with backstory .

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 5:01 PM

Ah, okay. See, I've started asking you instead of just assuming and blowing up.

But yeah, I'm an atheist. Just a combination of how I was raised and also an inability to believe due to my extreme pessimism and cynicism.

But I can hardly BLAME people for believing when under different circumstances and with a whole lot more serotonin I could have been just like them.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 5:01 PM

Riona: Okay, just wasn't sure what pure meant.

Mice have anxiety, but human problems probably didn't exist in the current form until humans, so it could be a workable interpretation with science.

At least we know there was an Eve. We can trace all our mitochondrial DNA back to one single female.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 5:13 PM

CHRISISALL

Quote:
Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
We can trace all our mitochondrial DNA back to one single female.

Bitch.

Sorry, I couldn't resist an easy joke.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 5:43 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by CHRISISALL:
Quote:
Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
We can trace all our mitochondrial DNA back to one single female.

Bitch.

Sorry, I couldn't resist an easy joke.

I'm not THAT old...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 5:46 PM

CHRISISALL

Quote:
Originally posted by BYTEMITE:

I'm not THAT old...

LOL, a rapiour wit you possess!!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 5:46 PM

CHRISISALL

Damn double sword post!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 5:57 PM

MAL4PREZ

Quote:
Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
1) Laws are often ignored and unenforceable. They do not matter. People will do what they do anyway, and there has never been a law passed that has ever stopped someone from breaking it.

Hunh. So, say Bob's lover John is dying. John's family is legally able to stop Bob from having any contact with John in the hospital or any choice is all those end-of-life issues, even though Bob and John lived together for 40 years. John's family can call the police to keep Bob away, and hire lawyers to keep Bob from controlling possessions he and the love of his life collected over the course of their lives.

And you say these laws can just be ignored? (And yes, this shit does happen.)

I can't even go further into your post. if this is how you see reality, your filters are something I can't even fathom.

Pardon the extremity of the analogy, but I mean it honestly. You're pretty much in line with Akin here. A woman's body can reject pregnancy from legitimate rape so what's the problem? Gay folks can just reject laws that limit them form living normal, free lives in control of their taxes and married states and such. So what's the problem?

*facepalm*^N

Yep. You and Akin. Very different worlds, but both equally far from the real one.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 6:16 PM

Nowhere is Western Culture more fundamentally fascistic than in its singular concept of deity. One guy at the tippy top of the pyramid, running the whole damn show, prison and torture for his enemies, eternal bliss for his toadies, and beer for his horses. Love me more than anything you've ever known or I'll burn you for eternity.

I'm absolutely an atheist when it comes to this truly brutal vision of the divine.

As a child in an incestuous home, I was a natural maltheist. God obviously wanted me dead and I survived only by luck/my own efforts to keep a low profile. Thank my lucky stars this god was neither omnipotent nor omnipresent! (Neither is the God of the Bible, btw.)

As a teenager I became a deeply angry atheist in the absolute sense. God was an ugly lie and a betrayal of natural human dignity. I can absolutely understand why atheists would be pretty pissed off. C'mon, folks, history.

But that didn't last 'cause I'd been, ahem, talking to angels my whole life. In my 20's I was still very antichristian and conceived of my angelic visitors as, y'know, nature spirits, devas, and such. But late in my 20's I learned otherwise.

So, I'm stuck with an "Angelic Realm" of truth/reality in my cosmology. But I have no evidence that they serve an old dude on a throne. As I understand it they coalesce out of the collective Will of the All; kind of the ultimate opinion pollsters. Ask all the fish and the kittens and the rocks and the telephone poles and the babies and the chocolate bars what is best in life and you get an answer and it ain't crush your enemies.

Animism, bay-bee! All the cool kids are doing it! Decentralized Spiritual Authority FTW!

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 6:17 PM

M4P, If you can't be polite, then I'm not going to talk to you. :/

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 6:21 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Kiki, why do I have to fudge with backstory (?) in order to believe something. If something doesn't make sense I think about it and try to logic out what could be going on to explain it, if that's fudging with backstory .

Well, OK, I'll post about your reaction to rainbows.

You assume that the Bible is right. Because the first time it mentions a rainbow in the bible is in regard to the flood, you assume two things: 1) rainbows never happened before then, and 2) rain never happened before then. I think a lot of people would at least pause at the first assumption and I REALLY think a lot of people would reject the second as nonsensical. It REALLY never rained before the flood? EVER? And that might cause them to re-think the whole rainbow-promise story and hence the validity of the source.

Instead what you did was take one story, and in order to reconcile it with rain diffracting light into colors as the explanation for rainbows, you created two other stories of relative unbelievability to cover over the problem. You created a backstory about rainbows - that they never happened before and that rain never happened before - in order to fudge away the problem of the natural explanation.

Also, I'm wondering - I type colloquially with all caps, multiple exclamation points or question marks, dots trailing off, dashes - does it mess up your reading machine?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 6:40 PM

MAL4PREZ

Quote:
Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
M4P, If you can't be polite, then I'm not going to talk to you. :/

I honestly don't see the lack of politeness. I'm not calling names, just giving my honest reactions and thoughts. If I'm mis-interpreting anything you've said, please clarify.

Note that I didn't bow out when you, intentionally or not, compared my side of things to Stalin. I can get over it. You can too.

If you can't, I'll only start wondering what tripwires in your psyche I hit too hard. These are just words I'm typing. Why are they beyond what you can bear?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 6:41 PM

Yeah, good gravy, how do you have any ecosystems on the planet without rain?!?

Actually, this is amusing, but the Theosophists say that the atmosphere of the Earth was very different during the time of Atlantis (which would correspond to antideluvian times in the Bible). Perminently overcast, lots of fog and mist, no discernable clouds, like a giant terrarium, or a user-friendly Venus. It's why all those Hallmark Cards use soft-focus lenses--it connects to our racial memories of the good old days of the Atlantian Empire. That's the news from Crazy Town. HKCavalier, reporting. Back to you, Chevy.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 6:50 PM

Beir bua agus beannacht

It doesn't really say so blatently, but the popular belief on that front is that there was something called the fermiment a barrier in the sky, think of a forcefield, which kept waters up there, thus protecting people from ultraviolet sun damage etc. helping everyone to live longer, hence those whacky long ages in the Bible, because duh no one lives that long now adays. This theory posites that the earth was quite a moist place with lots of springs and dew and so forth, and then when the flood happened the barrier was torn and all the water came pouring down, obviously not all at once, maybe it sprung a leak or something.

I'm treating this as a situation where someone is legitimately asking questions, as opposed to a situation where people are just looking to poke fun, and which ever way you guys take it (I bet I can guess knowing this crowd) is on you and you alone.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 6:53 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:
Quote:
Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
M4P, If you can't be polite, then I'm not going to talk to you. :/

I honestly don't see the lack of politeness. I'm not calling names, just giving my honest reactions and thoughts. If I'm mis-interpreting anything you've said, please clarify.

Note that I didn't bow out when you, intentionally or not, compared my side of things to Stalin. I can get over it. You can too.

If you can't, I'll only start wondering what tripwires in your psyche I hit too hard. These are just words I'm typing. Why are they beyond what you can bear?

The Stalin thing was unintentional. I wasn't comparing you guys to Stalin. I was comparing Stalin's secular government system to a theocracy. Both are bad because both are authoritarian. If you are not an authoritarian, you have nothing to be concerned about.

Comparing me to tom akin feels very insulting, and intentional. I wanted to get out of this before, and I'm going to just go now.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 6:56 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:
No revelation for me either. I always thought the Biblical God was pretty obviously not real, and frankly I'm baffled by people who find Biblical religions uplifting. I understand that they do, and more power to them for having something make them happy, but the whole thing is nothing but an oppressive downer to me. It's like knowing that some people out there LOVE the crispy crunch of fried tarantulas. Ack! How can they?

I find it far more inspiring and beautiful to skip Man's Translation (the Bible) and go straight to the source (the Universe and everything in it). Living by the Bible is like sitting at your TV watching a weatherperson describe a sunny day rather than walking out your door and enjoying it for yourself.

Regarding light and the "creator": the fallacious assumption is that everything must be created the way that human beings create a cheeseburger. Light and the physical structure of reality must have come into being in some way, but only the human desire to be the center of the universe demands that it all be "created" by a human-like tinkerer with thoughts and emotions and a robe and a beard and avid interest in what people eat and who/how they fuck.

Creationists say that life is too complicated to have come into being in any way other than being "designed" by a very human-like deity. Bullocks! Nature is far more complicated than we can imagine or explain, even after centuries of effort. It is a system that is more than capable of creating us.

The problem with a non-human natural system as "creator" is that this "belief" system doesn't empower "preachers" to bully people at the most fundamental level - by judging their souls. The Nature God doesn't care who marries who, whether women control their bodies, or what anyone does on a Sunday morning. Religion is all about a power structure. Some people like to hold the power--these make sure God has their image (old white father figure with lots and lots of rules and the ability to reward or punish). Other people like to be led, to be told what to do so they'll know they are behaving and can be righteously sure that they are "moral." They don't have to take responsibility for defining and testing their own morality, which is why I think so many hypocrites, sexual and otherwise, are drawn into religion. It shields them from judgment and strengthens their denial.

Religion is a total sham, but it works in the evolutionary sense. It does its job and survives as a social entity. In evolution things don't survive because they are "better", right? They survive because they "fit" their environment. Religion is an excellent fit to the human psyche and our social hierarchy.

I like to think we're outgrowing it. It'd be nice.

Luverly post. I agree wit you on nearly all of it. Except do you mean 'bollocks'?

I never describe myself as an atheist. I'm not religious, not in the way most people describe and understand the word.

Did some force or entity create the universe, start off the big bang. Maybe. Did that entity/power/force create a whole lot of (contradictory)rules for how a species of animal in a unremarkable galaxy somewhere in the universe should conduct their day to day lives? Not likely.

Are we all part/entwined with the greater existence of the universe, yes, as Sagan said, we are all the stuff of stars. Does it mean that consciousness exists outside of our mortal beings? Don't know, but it is worth considering.

Most Atheists I know are privately dismissive of religion, but will be polite face to face with those who are religious, unless they are being preached at or they feel that some civil liberty is being undermined.

I have had religious people say to my face that they think non religious people must be amoral...

I am glad I live in a remarkably secular country where those in power to not have to pay lip service to being religious and where religion, unlike the US, is a non issue for politicans. I'd be hard pushed to name the religious views of many politicans.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 7:04 PM

Beir bua agus beannacht

Magon's, it sounds like you are agnostic, you aren't totally sure either way, but you reckon it doesn't really matter all that much?

Kiki, no it doesn't mess it up. I can read your posts fine, it doesn't tell me when you write in all caps though so I don't know you're doing it, unless I had some sort of idea that you might be so I checked letter by letter, which is unlikely to happen. So it doesn't mess it up but I don't generally know if you're writing in all caps.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 7:09 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by RionaEire:
Magon's, good questions. I can give you my answers: Adam and Eve's kids, back then the genetics were pure, as in they hadn't gotten rutted up like they would later on, so genetically it wouldn't hurt to marry siblings. Sure it seems grotty now, but back then they probably didn't think anything of it because they hadn't been raised thinking it was grotty. Pharoahs married their siblings, and that was later, and they still did it, and by then they really _should have known better.
Dinosaurs: In Job a few types of dinosaurs are mentioned and described. As for the others I guess it just didn't come up, all you'd need is babies of each species on the ark anyways, you wouldn't need a huge brachiosaur or trisaratops, just little ones to save space, otherwise they'd sink the boat and everyone would be humped.
Solomon, was a king and kings have always gotten away with all kinds of stuff because they are kings. I don't approve of plural marriage, but there's a lot of stuff that goes on in ancient societies that I don't approve of.

I just feel really sad, Rione, that someone in this century could believe such things. How it that fundies pick and choose this stuff? Do you trust science enough to believe in gravity? In the speed of light? Do you accept that scientific innovation has led to people being able to fly, to travel in space, to cure diseases, to predict weather?

But someone tucked away there are streams of science,involving biology, palentology, geology et al that have all gotten it so wrong, according to creationists, that they have wrongly aged the earth, wrongly identified and aged fossils, gotten it wrong regarding pre human species....

Despite all this evidence, you choose to believe a story of mankind's existence made up in a time of none of the above knowledge. And worse that that, you squish knowledge around so that it fits (rather badly) into your version of reality.

I think you seem a sweet person, Rione, but I do really find this sad and disheartening.

BTW I wasn't asking questions for someone to answer, it was those ones key facts in the Bible made no sense, had no basis in reality or were directly contradictory of something else in the Bible that made me turn away from mainstream religion.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 7:27 PM

Beir bua agus beannacht

Edited for kindness' sake.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 7:28 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by RionaEire:
Magon's, it sounds like you are agnostic, you aren't totally sure either way, but you reckon it doesn't really matter all that much?

No, I don't accept religious dogma around explanations of god, hell, heaven, creation etc etc. I don't accept religious laws are from a god.

I'm curious about the universe. I accept that there is a lot outside of our understanding, perhaps even our capacity to understand.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 7:36 PM

Our Founding Fathers vs Christianity

George Washington: "Religious controversies are always
productive of more acrimony and irreconcilable hatreds
than those which spring from any other cause. Of all the
animosities which have existed among mankind, those which
are caused by the difference of sentiments in religion
appear to be the most inveterate and distressing, and
ought most to be depreciated. I was in hopes that the
enlightened and liberal policy, which has marked the
present age, would at least have reconciled Christians
of every denomination so far that we should never again
see the religious disputes carried to such a pitch as to
endanger the peace of society."

John Adams: "Can a free government possibly exist with the
Roman Catholic religion?"

Thomas Jefferson: "And the day will come when the mystical
generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in
the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the
generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter."

James Madison: "Religious bondage shackles and debilitates
the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise."

Thomas Paine: "Of all the tyrannies that affect mankind,
tyranny in religion is the worst."

Oonj:Every time someone tells me that the United States was
intended to be a Christian country, I shudder and ask,
"What history books have you been reading?"

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 7:39 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

"It doesn't really say so blatently, but the popular belief on that front is that there was something called the fermiment ..."

Is that in the bible? Then why do you believe it?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 7:49 PM

Beir bua agus beannacht

There are things about God seperating the waters above the earth from the waters on the earth, statements of that nature are why some people have come to that conclusion.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 7:54 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

But does the bible SAY such a thing exists? Or is that just a story people tacked-on later?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 8:25 PM

Beir bua agus beannacht

The bit about waters above the earth is in there, so people thought about it and came up with the fermament theory.

The thing about believing in something is that if it feels real to you, in your life then it makes sense to you. If you've experienced it then it makes sense to you, even if it doesn't make sense to others. Look at HK Cav's beliefs, his experiences, whatever they are made of, constitute how he believes, it may not make sense to me or others but he has experienced things that contribute to his belief systems.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 8:35 PM

Hey, hey, hey, don't drag me into this. This hooey about the Earth being encased in a force field is pure fundamentalist humbug. There is exactly ZERO evidence of any such thing. It violates every law of physics you care to name. You buy in or you do not. It has nothing to do with your experience. You accept all manner of stuff on authority and that is exactly what folk are saying. If you accept a thing because an outside authority told you, you're not basing what you believe on direct experience.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 8:47 PM

Beir bua agus beannacht

You've had unique experiences which inform your belief system. The only reason I mentioned you is because you came along and you and I are probably the people around whose beliefs vary the most from the common Atheistic/agnostic set that prevail in popularity 'round these parts.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 9:00 PM

I dunno about that, Rionna. Me and Frem have a lot in common, spiritually speaking, and neither of us are too comfortable with young earth stuff. And from where I sit, my "beliefs" such as they are, aren't too far from any of the Atheists we've been hearing from. I just have a huge pile of anomalous data to factor into any hypotheses I come up with.

Everything I think is going on with the Cosmos is pretty strictly provisional--if a better, more complete explanation comes along I will gladly abandon my current models.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 9:00 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

" ... so people thought about it and came up with the fermament theory."

Yes, people came up with it, though I hesitate to call it a theory. A theory can be falsified - ie tested, while this story can't be. You either believe it, or you don't, but there's no testing it.

Aside from anything else I might say about it, I wonder why you would believe it. You claim to believe the bible - I presume that means literally, every word. But what if the stories that PEOPLE make up about the words in the bible are false? After all, they come from people, not the bible, according to what you posted above. Aren't you then putting the words of man before the words of god and letting them lead you astray? Wouldn't it be far better to say - I don’t know how it is, but the words in the bible are true, instead of depending on these little stories to fudge the conflict between the bible and what you know of the world?

Or is that nagging itch in your brain that half feels some of those things in the bible don't REALLY fit with what you know SO insistent you just have to scratch it with those little fudges?

Basically, why have these non-biblical stories that people make up, and why believe them if you believe in the bible as the perfect source of truth?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 10:06 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:

Yes, people came up with it, though I hesitate to call it a theory. A theory can be falsified - ie tested, while this story can't be. You either believe it, or you don't, but there's no testing it.

It's no more a theory than the creation myths of the ancient Greeks.

Quote:

In the beginning there was an empty darkness. The only thing in this void was Nyx, a bird with black wings. With the wind she laid a golden egg and for ages she sat upon this egg. Finally life began to stir in the egg and out of it rose Eros, the god of love. One half of the shell rose into the air and became the sky and the other became the Earth. Eros named the sky Uranus and the Earth he named Gaia. Then Eros made them fall in love.

Uranus and Gaia had many children together and eventually they had grandchildren. Some of their children become afraid of the power of their children. Kronus, in an effort to protect himself, swallowed his children when they were still infants. However, his wife Rhea hid their youngest child. She gave him a rock wrapped in swaddling clothes, which he swallowed, thinking it was his son.

Once the child, Zeus, had reached manhood his mother instructed him on how to trick his father to give up his brothers and sisters. Once this was accomplished the children fought a mighty war against their father. After much fighting the younger generation won. With Zeus as their leader, they began to furnish Gaia with life and Uranus with stars.

Soon the Earth lacked only two things: man and animals. Zeus summoned his sons Prometheus (fore-thought) and Epimetheus (after-thought). He told them to go to Earth and create men and animals and give them each a gift.

Prometheus set to work forming men in the image of the gods and Epimetheus worked on the animals. As Epimetheus worked he gave each animal he created one of the gifts. After Epimetheus had completed his work Prometheus finally finished making men. However when he went to see what gift to give man Epimetheus shamefacedly informed him that he had foolishly used all the gifts.

Pretty similar stuff huh? How people with no access to modern scientific methods made sense of the world and how it and us came into existence.

They are lovely stories, rich in cultural history. They can be appreciated for their wisdom, but they are not fact.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 11:06 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

I'm just trying to get past the little point of how it is that a true believer in the perfect word can stand to have it fudged-up. You'd think if it was so perfect, any addition, subtraction or change would be a problem. So why tinker with it with all the little add-on stories? I probably won't get an answer, though.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2012 3:59 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
They can't prove the non-existence of god...

Dumbass apparently engaged his knee-jerk before reading the rest of my post.

No. I was kind'a hoping that you'd retract it before I had to show the flaws in your 'logic'.

So...

A guy walks up to me and says, "There is a god". This seems like pretty strong evidence to me that he believes that there is a god. I ask him, "Okay. Prove it". He may quote obviously impossible stuff from some holy book he says "proves" there is a god, but unless his god pops his head over a cloud and says "Here I am", sooner or later it's gonna come down to the fact that he has faith in a god.

A guy walks up to me and says, "There is no god". This seems like pretty strong evidence to me that he believes that there is no god. I ask him, "Okay. Prove it". He quotes obviously impossible stuff from holy books that he says "prove" there is no god, but sooner or later it's gonna come down to the fact that he has faith that there is no god, and he can't even expect god to show up and confirm his non-existence.

So you're basically saying that it's all right to ask a religionist to prove there is a god, but not all right to ask an Atheist to prove there isn't. Sorry, but if folks make assertions that they represent as fact, you got the right to say "prove it".

As to proving a negative...there is no 'I' in 'Team'.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2012 7:18 AM

Beir bua agus beannacht

Geezer you're right and that's what this all boils down to. I can't prove there is a supreme being, or any being beyond humanity for that matter, and Kiki can't prove that there isn't. It all comes down to your experiences and your faith, in whatever you place it in.

Cav, I meant everyone on this thread, I should have been more specific, because I do know that you and Frem have some commonality in your beliefs.

Kiki, can't a woman get some sleep before she answers you? :) There are definitely some figurative things in the Bible, some things are meant to be metaphorical, parables etc. But I do believe the creation story. As to why people come up with ideas to explain things that aren't addressed, of which there are plenty, I think its just human nature to do so. Some of those ideas (I won't call them theories for you) are things that make sense to me, though I'm not married to them, and some of those ideas don't make sense. It really doesn't matter in the end which of those extra ideas are true really I suppose, though I see where people get the fermament idea from references in the creation story and a bit further in. But it really doesn't matter in the end. What matters is making that connection and committment to follow Jesus and choosing to give your allegiance to him. I think the other stuff kind of falls into place, at least for me it does. All those other things aren't the things that seem to matter in the end in comparison, they will work themselves out.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2012 10:06 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:

No. I was kind'a hoping that you'd retract it before I had to show the flaws in your 'logic'.

So...

A guy walks up to me and says, "There is a god". This seems like pretty strong evidence to me that he believes that there is a god. I ask him, "Okay. Prove it". He may quote obviously impossible stuff from some holy book he says "proves" there is a god, but unless his god pops his head over a cloud and says "Here I am", sooner or later it's gonna come down to the fact that he has faith in a god.

A guy walks up to me and says, "There is no god". This seems like pretty strong evidence to me that he believes that there is no god. I ask him, "Okay. Prove it". He quotes obviously impossible stuff from holy books that he says "prove" there is no god, but sooner or later it's gonna come down to the fact that he has faith that there is no god, and he can't even expect god to show up and confirm his non-existence.

So you're basically saying that it's all right to ask a religionist to prove there is a god, but not all right to ask an Atheist to prove there isn't. Sorry, but if folks make assertions that they represent as fact, you got the right to say "prove it".

As to proving a negative...there is no 'I' in 'Team'.

it's the old, if I believe it, it can't be a lie.

There certainly is proof that that most of the Bible is facturally incorrect

There is proof that the world is more than 5000 years old
It wasn't created in 7 days
Stars were not createed after the earth

etc etc And that is just the first few pages of Genesis.

I don't know how anyone with a functioning brain could believe that the Bible was somehow related to fact.

Once that is clear, it seems to me you have two logical choices, you can, as most Christians I know, see it as spiritual guide with much wisdom, or you can start to ask questions about other issues pertaining to religion. Once you start asking serious questions, it seems to me to be pretty difficult not to really question the whole underpinning of religion.

Nevertheless, there are smart people who are religious. I not sure how they reconcile knowledge with belief, but I have no issue with them.

I do have issues with fundamentalists, and I make no apologies for that. People who believe that the Bible is a factual, historical document are deluded, and capable of being dangerous.

I don't ask anyone to prove the existence of a god. That seems to me to be a childish thing to do. The basis of this thread was not to start a war on religion, but was simply a discussion from a number of posters on how they moved away from religion.

My husband, interestingly enough, never has had religion, been brought up as an atheist. The concept of religion is completely foreign to him in every way.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2012 10:33 AM

Quote:
My husband, interestingly enough, never has had religion, been brought up as an atheist. The concept of religion is completely foreign to him in every way.

Yeah, that's kinda like what it was with me. I wouldn't necessarily say it was foreign to me, because one time my parents got my grandparents to baby sit me on a Sunday when I was like three, so my grandparents decided to take me to church with them. I don't know if they had any secret agenda to save my soul or anything, but, it kind of didn't work out at all?

I pretty much threw a massive hissy fit about everything from having to wear a frikkin' doll dress to going somewhere I did not want and then the boredom. Oh the terrible terrible boredom. Those poor other kids, how do you STAND it? Spend half of Sunday sitting in a stuffy building listening to people talk and sing. I can't even sit in a MOVIE because I have shit to do, for reals.

Anyway, I actually did go through a period where I hated all the religious types and picked fights with them. Even bit one girl who got a little uppity and snobby. And it used to be indiscriminate, I'd attack Christians and Buddhists and everyone for what I kinda thought were superstitions. But then I realized that most of the people in the world are religious or undecided, and most of them are just regular people who'd never done anything to me or anyone else.

It's the same thing with like Republican or Democratic browncoats versus the politicians. Most of you never DONE anything to anyone. But those politicians, do I ever hate those guys. I also kinda hate priests if they get political or say bigotted garbage or they mess with kids. But otherwise I realized my beef wasn't with the regular religious people, but rather the people setting the policy for the churches.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2012 11:25 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

I have heard the firmament theory before.

It invents a lot of details in order to explain away a single statement in the Bible. It seems simpler to me to disregard a statement that makes no sense, rather than to create many new ideas in order to explain it away.

We know that God did not write the Bible. Even people who believe explicitly in their Christian faith know this to be true.

Some people might like to believe that God would protect the contents of the Bible, keep them from being changed by humans.

But even a devout believer can walk into a book store and find dozens of different versions and translations of the sacred text. Each with a few words translated slightly differently. If only one can be true, which are the lies? Why should we believe any of them are unadulterated?

Even the devout believer knows that there was a gathering of men who decided which books to include in the Bible and which books to reject. Even the man of faith knows that this decision was made by human beings in ancient times. There are currently books published about the rejected texts of the Bible. Rejected by men who held a meeting, not by God.

These things are not disputable. We know that human beings have tinkered with these documents, translated and mistranslated these documents, and even selected which documents to include. Humans, not God.

So I have no problem doubting a text when it comes into conflict with common sense and good behavior. You can be a believer in God, but still apply good sense to very basic facts.

I have not read the part of the bible that has men declaring how much brighter the sun is, how much more withering it is. I have not read the part of the bible where men exclaim in wonder at seeing stars for the first time, or seeing the moon with remarkable clarity for the first time. These are notable things that would be attributable to the glory of God. These are things the chroniclers of Noah's tale would surely think to mention, about how the entire sky is completely different ever since that remarkable flood.

It's easier to disregard a rainbow than it is to invent a floating, heavenly sphere of water encapsulating the globe.

In fact, it would be easier to say that God re-dedicated the existing Rainbow to serve his covenant rather than to presume a rainbow had never happened before.

Almost any explanation makes more sense than the firmament theory. The simplest explanations are the best ones to start with.

In my opinion.

--Anthony

Note to Self:
Raptor - woman testifying about birth control is a slut (the term applies.)
Six - Wow, isn't Niki quite the CUNT? And, yes, I spell that in all caps....
Wulf - Niki is a stupid fucking bitch who should hurry up and die.

“The stupid neither forgive nor forget; the naive forgive and forget; the wise forgive but do not forget.” -Thomas Szasz

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2012 2:34 PM

Beir bua agus beannacht

Even I don't buy the 5000 years thing, I reckon its more like 10, 12, 15, I don't really know, I don't think it matters all that much, sometimes time can be fudged with a bit.

Greek mythology is fun Magon's.

Its kind of funny though because I'd never heard the term "fundy" until I came here , even though I live in the most liberal city in The States, I guess you learn new things all the time really. Then I heard you guys using this goofy nickname abreviatory term and was like what's that, news to me.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2012 2:45 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Quote:
I don't really know, I don't think it matters all that much

Hello,

To me, that's the main thing. If it doesn't matter that much, I skip it. There is some good meat and potatoes in the Bible if you overlook the bitter bits that don't feel right on the tongue.

It just saddens me when some people who identify as 'Christians' choose to focus on the bitter bits, the wrongest parts, rather than embrace the good parts of the philosophy.

My Dad has spent my whole life teaching me great things. Why would I dwell on the one or two dumbass statements he's made while ignoring the best gems of wisdom?

--Anthony

Note to Self:
Raptor - woman testifying about birth control is a slut (the term applies.)
Six - Wow, isn't Niki quite the CUNT? And, yes, I spell that in all caps....
Wulf - Niki is a stupid fucking bitch who should hurry up and die.

“The stupid neither forgive nor forget; the naive forgive and forget; the wise forgive but do not forget.” -Thomas Szasz

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2012 5:47 PM

BTW, I cannot find RWA in any 'Net acronym list.
What's it mean?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2012 6:20 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Riona

My comment about getting an answer wasn't about timeliness, you weren't being chided for that. Isn't it amazing how scrambled communication can be depending on what assumptions each party makes?

"I can't prove there is a supreme being, or any being beyond humanity for that matter ..."

But you base your belief on a book, which I can show you is wrong more than a few times. So whether or not you can prove there's a god, and whether or not I can prove there isn't, I can prove your source which is the basis for your belief is wrong.

"As to why people come up with ideas to explain things that aren't addressed, of which there are plenty, I think its just human nature to do so."

That's my point. If people didn't SENSE discrepancies between what they believe and what they know, and feel a need to ADDRESS them, they wouldn't feel compelled to make up those stories that at least try to cover over those discrepancies. I'd go further and say that like the RWAs here, taking that one furtive step, no matter how unsupported, to resolve cognitive dissonance by denying reality's challenge to your beliefs actually makes your beliefs stronger. I intuit it's the same mental process.

"What matters is making that connection and committment to follow Jesus and choosing to give your allegiance to him."

And why would you do that? Because you BELIEVE in it. And why do you believe it? B/c it's in the perfect book of truth. Except when the book is wrong, in which case the perfection of the truth doesn't matter, it's about belief.

It goes infinitely in circles inside circles inside circles ...

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2012 6:20 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Right Wing Authoritarian (RWA), from The Authoritarians, fully available online here
http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/

---------------
Oh, I see I missed my place in line. Well, MY story...

I think I was about 9. It's not that I believed in the Easter Bunny, or Santa, but I believed the world was a nice place. When I heard trains in the summer night, I felt like they were part of the human effort that kept me safe. It pleased me to think of lights and homes in the distance and grownups working, even at night, even while I slept. I liked to think I had something like a guardian angel, too. That God loved me, more or less.

And then I looked up into the sky one night; the stars were so distant and cold and I felt alone, unprotected and insignificant, and that was it.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2012 6:51 PM

The stars! - The Stars!! Can you see the stars -- O!

We had warm summer nights in the SF Bay area. Sometimes, we'd
take our sleeping bags, and lie out under the stars.

They were so beautiful and so many, it hurt to see them at the
same time a great joy!

And I knew that many of them had planets, & some of those planets
had life. And I would be earthbound, never to see or know any of
those different-from-Earth places.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2012 6:54 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by ANTHONYT:

We know that God did not write the Bible. Even people who believe explicitly in their Christian faith know this to be true.

Some people might like to believe that God would protect the contents of the Bible, keep them from being changed by humans.

But even a devout believer can walk into a book store and find dozens of different versions and translations of the sacred text. Each with a few words translated slightly differently. If only one can be true, which are the lies? Why should we believe any of them are unadulterated?

Even the devout believer knows that there was a gathering of men who decided which books to include in the Bible and which books to reject. Even the man of faith knows that this decision was made by human beings in ancient times. There are currently books published about the rejected texts of the Bible. Rejected by men who held a meeting, not by God.

These things are not disputable. We know that human beings have tinkered with these documents, translated and mistranslated these documents, and even selected which documents to include. Humans, not God.

So I have no problem doubting a text when it comes into conflict with common sense and good behavior. You can be a believer in God, but still apply good sense to very basic facts.

And that is the trouble, isn't it? There are people who believe every word of the Bible is true. Fundamentalists, who ignore scientific theory because it conflicts with that which, while god did not write, he guided the hands that did.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2012 7:24 PM

from DANIEL THE PROPHETPart Two.pdf
"Mary was descended from Nathan (another Son of Bathsheba and brother of
Solomon). Joseph (legal father of Jesus) was descended from Solomon thru
Jehoiachin. Jesus' legal right to the throne of David came from Joseph.
Fulfillment of the prophecy concerning biological descent came thru Mary."

Reason #2 to have the Old Testament as part of the Christian religion is that
it shows the line of Solomon to Jesus, albeit, not a true, direct line.

Reason #1 to have the Old Testament as part of the Christian religion is that
it shows just how badly them people needed a messiah and teacher. They were
primitive, greedy, vicious and really messed up. Well ... some of 'em were.

So to me, all the devout Christians who quote from the Old Testament to prove
that it is a good thing to stone adulterous wives and gay men have got the
whole thing backwards.

Jesus told them their old ways were savage and bad. At least, that's how I see
it. I am the only person I know who's always saying (to myself), "People, how
can you think the OT is of equal importance to the NT? It's supposed to be
subordinant to the NT, and it is The Bad Example."

Please put that olde book in the right perspective!

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 7, 2012 7:32 PM