I only have one thing to say dude... God is alive! We are human, we question the unquestionable, we are infinite.
I say, you should have had this thought with God first before blogging about it. Have faith brethrin but also remember you are human and it is good to question because that power to do so was given to you.
Debate me about the bible
Im not christian so I always wondered about this: If satan is evil and the enemy of god, why does he punish non christians and bad/evil people? shouldnt he be doing the opposite?
I say, you should have had this thought with God first before blogging about it. Have faith brethrin but also remember you are human and it is good to question because that power to do so was given to you.
That's an example of something I always found quite alienating with many religions: this 'humblification' of humans, who are always classified as some kind of submissive species in relation to their respective god. Some religions seem to equate them more positively with 'children', for others we are just slaves to god.
In fact, we as humanity have come an extraordinarily long way from our roots to where we are now. We may certainly have our faults, but I think we can be damn proud of what we have achieved - without the help of any god or supernatural being. You may say that this deity gave us the 'equipment' enabling us to develop ourselves, but however you want to see it, fact is that we were the ones who advanced ourselves, not some deity.
We are now at the brink of some technological developments that may question the whole definition of what makes a god. With the advances in life sciences and bioengineering, we can manipulate, change and even create life in ways that were unfathomable even 100 years ago. Ways that were supposedly only available to a god. Give it another 50, maybe 100 years of technological development, and we could basically do anything God or Jesus did as described in the Bible. You know the quote that any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic - and also from religion.
The one big breaking point for most religions relying on the concept of one god will come sooner than most may realize. It's when we first manage to technologically create an artificial consciousness. Creating an entirely new type of life, within its own entirely new type of universe, which we have total control over. For such a being, we would be omniscient and omnipotent. According to current definitions, this would make anyone a true god over his own creation (and create a whole new category of ethical problems). And if we ever manage to copy our own biological consciousness into an artificial reality, giving us true immortality, then all limits are off. Because in the end, it's the physical limitations of our biological bodies that makes us weak and mortal. This can be technologically overcome given enough time.
So I guess my point is that there may be some supernatural being that created us and our universe. But it's us who developed our species. We should be proud of this and take both credit and responsibility for it. There is no reason to be humble or subservient to any deity (nor will it probably expect this, should it exist). Ultimately, we can advance in such a way to become gods ourselves at some point. Maybe it's all a cycle in the end. Maybe our future artificial intelligences will write Bibles over their creators. Who knows.
[quote name='ScareCro' timestamp='1307136320' post='4819226']
I say, you should have had this thought with God first before blogging about it. Have faith brethrin but also remember you are human and it is good to question because that power to do so was given to you.
That's an example of something I always found quite alienating with many religions: this 'humblification' of humans, who are always classified as some kind of submissive species in relation to their respective god. Some religions seem to equate them more positively with 'children', for others we are just slaves to god.
In fact, we as humanity have come an extraordinarily long way from our roots to where we are now. We may certainly have our faults, but I think we can be damn proud of what we have achieved - without the help of any god or supernatural being. You may say that this deity gave us the 'equipment' enabling us to develop ourselves, but however you want to see it, fact is that we were the ones who advanced ourselves, not some deity.
We are now at the brink of some technological developments that may question the whole definition of what makes a god. With the advances in life sciences and bioengineering, we can manipulate, change and even create life in ways that were unfathomable even 100 years ago. Ways that were supposedly only available to a god. Give it another 50, maybe 100 years of technological development, and we could basically do anything God or Jesus did as described in the Bible. You know the quote that any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic - and also from religion.
The one big breaking point for most religions relying on the concept of one god will come sooner than most may realize. It's when we first manage to technologically create an artificial consciousness. Creating an entirely new type of life, within its own entirely new type of universe, which we have total control over. For such a being, we would be omniscient and omnipotent. According to current definitions, this would make anyone a true god over his own creation (and create a whole new category of ethical problems). And if we ever manage to copy our own biological consciousness into an artificial reality, giving us true immortality, then all limits are off. Because in the end, it's the physical limitations of our biological bodies that makes us weak and mortal. This can be technologically overcome given enough time.
So I guess my point is that there may be some supernatural being that created us and our universe. But it's us who developed our species. We should be proud of this and take both credit and responsibility for it. There is no reason to be humble or subservient to any deity (nor will it probably expect this, should it exist). Ultimately, we can advance in such a way to become gods ourselves at some point. Maybe it's all a cycle in the end. Maybe our future artificial intelligences will write Bibles over their creators. Who knows.
[/quote]
What you're saying makes sense if you equate success with technological advancement and knowledge acquisition. If God's goal is to create a loving relationship with people, I would say it's rather irrelevant, more likely it's contrary to that kind of success. I've seen that from experience during mission trips. Oftentimes the simplest conditions create the happiest people. Secularism has proposed similar ideas, Fight Club comes to mind, "The stuff you own ends up owning you." Sometimes I think if the word went to hell and everyone had to farm, hunt, and watch out for their neighbor to survive, Xanax would be irrelevant.
Matthew McConaughey said it for me in Contact, but science in itself doesn't make people happy. The day that people create the technological breakthrough to live forever is the day that suicide rates start to climb exponentially. I fail to see why this should allow us to exalt ourselves before God, assuming you believe in that.
I only have one thing to say dude... God is alive! We are human, we question the unquestionable, we are infinite.
I say, you should have had this thought with God first before blogging about it. Have faith brethrin but also remember you are human and it is good to question because that power to do so was given to you.
Another example of flawless logic from a Christian.
To generalize:
It is good to X, because that power to do so was given to you.
To extrapolate:
It is good to murder, because that power to do so was given to you.
It is good to worship the devil, because that power to do so was given to you.
etc.
People believing in god have experienced something that agnosticists have not. Whether that "something" is being talked dumbed by missionaries, or a spiritiual revelation, what matters after all is the faith: Because faith can get you through life much better than apathy. You can believe in God and still think rationally. You can accept that stuff beyond mortal grasp can quite possibly exist. You needn't to believe in God and She may still love you. You aren't forced to believe. If you decide not to believe, God may still love you as well.
TL; DR: God wants us to become what we can be. That's what I believe.
TL; DR: God wants us to become what we can be. That's what I believe.
TL; DR: God wants us to become what we can be. That's what I believe.
Based on what? I understand it's nice to believe that. But what logic do you base this belief on?
[quote name='HappyCoder' timestamp='1306950761' post='4818365']
Anybody who wants to know the truth needs to read the scriptures, ponder of them, then ask with a sincere heart if it is true. If done with faith the Holy Ghost will releal the truth of this directly to our minds. That is why I beleive.
What happens though when contradictory answers are received by different people? How do you determine which is true?
[/quote]
Any examples there?
[quote name='Machaira' timestamp='1307038415' post='4818783']
[quote name='HappyCoder' timestamp='1306950761' post='4818365']
Anybody who wants to know the truth needs to read the scriptures, ponder of them, then ask with a sincere heart if it is true. If done with faith the Holy Ghost will releal the truth of this directly to our minds. That is why I beleive.
What happens though when contradictory answers are received by different people? How do you determine which is true?
[/quote]
Any examples there?
[/quote]
How about unbaptized infants go to purgatory for eternity vs. nevermind, they go to heaven? Or female clergy are expressly forbidden vs. it's fine to let women respond to a call? Or priests shouldn't ever marry vs. they should probably be allowed to?
Demanding examples of inconsistencies in religious thought, particularly examples of inconsistencies between interpretations of scriptures, is like asking if there's such a thing as wind while a hurricane is barreling down on you.
What you're saying makes sense if you equate success with technological advancement and knowledge acquisition. If God's goal is to create a loving relationship with people, I would say it's rather irrelevant, more likely it's contrary to that kind of success. I've seen that from experience during mission trips. Oftentimes the simplest conditions create the happiest people. Secularism has proposed similar ideas, Fight Club comes to mind, "The stuff you own ends up owning you." Sometimes I think if the word went to hell and everyone had to farm, hunt, and watch out for their neighbor to survive, Xanax would be irrelevant.
Antibiotics, ie. not dying from a simple wound infection would not be irrelevant. Access to clean water and food wouldn't be. Having a life expectancy over 35 would be quite relevant. Not being enslaved by your neighbor because he happens to belong to a tribe that is more powerful than yours would also be quite nice. We take all these things for granted, at least in the western world. It's technological advancement, knowledge acquisition and social evolution that brought us all that, not a personal relationship with a deity. Maybe some technological achievements don't contribute to happiness. You don't really need an iphone, a flatscreen TV and a sports car to be happy. You could certainly live a very happy life in a pre-industrial civilization. But some parts of technology do absolutely and objectively increase your well-being, especially those related to the medical sector.
The day that people create the technological breakthrough to live forever is the day that suicide rates start to climb exponentially.
I'm not sure if artificially induced eternal life will increase suicide rates. It will depend on the type of environment you would be living in and how adaptable it would be. Given the digital consciousness version, we would probably progressively modify the way we think and the way our mind works in order to fit this new society. Essentially artificially guided evolution. And who says that the eternal life religions promise would not also lead to increased suicide rates (if such a thing would be possible there), because some people could not cope with it any longer ? If you say that they will be eternally happy because they're close to their god, what is the difference to eternally pumping large amounts of serotonin and dopamine into your brain (or doing the digital equivalent to an AI) ? After all, the feeling of happiness is just a biochemical reaction.
I fail to see why this should allow us to exalt ourselves before God, assuming you believe in that.
I'm a pragmatic agnostic, so I don't believe in a god, at least not in the form it is described by any major religion. I believe that whatever entity created the universe (if any) did not meddle with it after its initial creation. Everything humanity has achieved, we achieved it on our own. While this doesn't give us the right to put ourselves above some god, we shouldn't put us under a god either. I equate divinity with knowledge, and as always, everything is relative. I think that given 'enough' knowledge, we can become gods ourselves.
People believing in god have experienced something that agnosticists have not. Whether that "something" is being talked dumbed by missionaries, or a spiritiual revelation, what matters after all is the faith: Because faith can get you through life much better than apathy.
How can you say something like this ? This holier-than-thou attitude is really off putting. How can you know that you experienced something that we lack ? Maybe it is the other way round ? You don't need faith to lead a happy and fulfilling life. And there are many things in life besides apathy and faith into a deity. Believing in yourself, your own abilities and the ones of your loved ones, for example.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
