I'm so glad that I am taking AP Psyc. All right, I read through the posts very carefully and Eyeless Sid never said Jesus did "nothing", he was stating that Jesus could possibly be a person that had little significance but became famous from his so called healings. Why do I love psychology? Because you need an open mind: Confirmation Bias: The tendency to believe in evidence confirming our beliefs and ignoring evidence going against them. God /= Jesus. God=Jesus=Holy Spirit Am I the only formal Christian atheist that went (and is still forced to go) to church? Like seriously, this is the worst interpretation ever, never mind the rest of the damn statement being false! _________________________________________________ Anyways, your fellow religious friend Erico is described above. We believe that he will ignore all facts, cited information, or well proposed points UNLESS they agree with his beliefs. Simple as that. The religion argument can never be won by Christians or Muslims or Jews because of human nature. On top of this, you basically inferred, or believed what you wanted to see, stating the word "nothing" instead of "little significance". If everyone was to realize this truth, that being Bias will always come around when someone is RAISED on one universal idea before they are able to properly make free choices themselves, we would all be atheist. End of story... Actually it continues. Another poor argument will be brought up to counter mine. If this occurs, then whatever. You may continue to follow your beliefs. And bring poor arguments to the field to look unintelligent. Whatever. The argument presented about Jesus and Julius is a poor one. We are arguing about god, not a universal religion called Christianity. Please stop bringing the son of god into this topic. You are preventing other people from effectively stating their arguments of god's existence, and I want to hear a new theory besides the one covering the last 13 pages. Thanks. You cant read a page out of a normal novel. We are arguing all points of Religion. Since WHEN did you find the heading of the debate say Christianity. It says Religion. Christianity is one of many religions. Still, if you want to unlock "truth and secrets" then you could read the Bible that all Christians support so much. Also, god HAS NO IMAGE. He is everything and can't be an image or SIGN for that matter. Images are for man (and animals, we are animals). (Of course I DONT believe this, but) Some people have to be given facts of their own religion from an atheist. Um, ironic much? Holy crap you can read! Thought people like you don't exist in the forums. Thanks for taking the time and reviewing my basic points and ideas. And I agree, if no religion raises you, then most likely you won't follow one. I wish we could use the scientific method for this...
If we were to leave out 'the son of God' in this topic, then we'd lose a very valuable key to unlocking the truth and secrets of said 'god'. Practically, you're saying, 'the son of god' is irrelevant to 'god' itself, yet people WORSHIP Jesus as a sign of God. Hell, it's called Christianity for a reason.
What he's trying to say is that Christianity isn't the only religion being debated, and that the thread is about GOD, not God and his little people. Most of the Christians posting in this thread (ER1C0 and greatjedi) are making all Christians look bad. Honestly, it pains me to see how ignorant people can be. If I wasn't raised Christian, meaning that my parents hadn't taught me about "God", then it probably never would have even crossed my mind that something like that could be real or exist.
I never said one thing about this thread being solely devoted to the basis of Christianity. However, if there are religious claims, such as Jesus being the son of God, we should definitely take into consideration what impact that has on today's views on religion. The same could go for Islamic and Buddhist beliefs, however I'm not very knowledgeable on their traditions, so I'm obviously not going to post anything about that until I've done some research and learned their practices. The topic of God is a very broad subject. This thread isn't asking for scientific evidence of God's existence. No, it's open to all forms of discussion relating God's existence. Also, I can read too. It's sad you say you're taking Psychology classes but you fail to understand my statement. I'm taking Psychology too, but you honestly can't think basic knowledge in the subject can help you determine peoples reasoning for believing what they do. School just started for nearly everyone, and even if you're in college, it's still too soon for you to be basing your knowledge of people views on psychology.
I'm sorry to hear that. Why, may I ask, do I make all Christians look bad? Yes, I'll confess I've been rather angry. It's just one thing leads to another.. and it also seems as if people in this thread do not fear God and are openly willing to say things against him, which I find very very unacceptable. I think It's just unbelievable that someone would do such things, especially, in the presence of many Christians. No, no, and no. You don't seem to be reading my posts. As I already said, I'm just proving Jesus was alive at one point, and that I haven't even gotten to the point of Jesus being God. But man can be God... which would equal man can = perfect. ......... ........ ......... Yes, but my high school teacher wasn't proving Jesus was alive at one point. Plus, why would your college professor be proving Jesus wasn't alive at one point?? That's a little messed up. Again, you don't seem to be reading my posts. Maybe I need to highlight again: Julius Caesar was just an example and my point is that many people in history have a lack of evidence to have once existed, but you seem to push Jesus away, without saying why you accept many other people in history, but not Jesus. Now you'll probably reply with, "no Julius existed", or something of the sort. Yes, I'll accept that Julius wasn't the best of examples, but I'm still going with the fact that he doesn't have undeniable proof, just as Jesus... so Let's stop repeating ourselves over and over and over and over and over... well, at least that's how it feels like to me. We've told you. I've told you about 3 times already, so has Jedi... Um... once again, you fail to remember anything that any of us have posted. A hurricane hit a small town and took off the steeple of a church, because that small place was about to allow gays to be pastors. Tell me that isn't a miracle. If you look for him, you'll find him. If you disregard him as a myth, you won't find him. Search and you will find, ask and you will be answered. Yes, because we created a hurricane. Right. You don't need pictures or recordings. He communicates to us personally, and until you step out and actually try to communicate to him without testing him, then he won't communicate to you. Freedom comes to mind. He saved our sins, and you're being extremely disrespectful. Please STOP basing your arguments off of opinions. (yes, you, Eyeless Sid) How does water turn to wine? How does a sea turn to blood? How does a person live again from the dead? How does a blind man see? In other words, it can't be that a garden is a human-based word without other forms of higher being. It's a garden ruled by someone who cares not that he's recognized, cares not that he's rewarded, but rather cares that he watches over and sees what's done, and left undone. NEW argument: We as single forms of life have been reproducing to make new forms of life. We are "created" in the womb and born outside it, but there's one thing. We thrive off of curiosity and fear. How is it that we all hold these traits from birth? Organisms have changed, but they change because of themselves. Our 10,000 years ago, yesterday, and even today, we mostly learn because of curiosity and fear. Now where does this curiosity and fear come from? Where do these baby-like traits come from? Are they just natural traits? And we haven't gained these traits. We've always been fearful and curious. That brings in something else. Nature. Even nature has rules to abide by. Why is it that large masses behold gravity? Why is it energy even exists? Why is the smallest thing can only be an atom? Because nature has rules too. Physics. Gravity is one big example here. Nature holds rules, so where do these rules come from? They've always been there. So how is it nature can't go outside certain boundaries? Boundaries that I believe were indeed created by a higher being. Answer these, atheists.
God is the creator of the world, man, and man's ability to sin and be tempted into evil. So if this is all true then our ability to question god's existence was also instilled by god. So at what point are we supposed to believe what our fathers tell us over proven fact? When we see daddy putting the presents under the tree?
What kind of argument is that Erico? You question and answer without seeking facts? Are you some kind of moron (quote pyramids too, at least split the post dude). Gravity is created by the extreme rotation of Earths axis. We spin at hundreds of miles an hour just like our neighboring planets. If you had enough mass, you would rotate with the vacuum of space as well. Every animal experiences curiousity and fear if they have at least a simple nervous system. WE are animals, and 40% of people I tell this to claim that I am wrong. We hold these traits because deep in our genetic code, there exists a possibility that we were previously created with this in our DNA AFTER millions of years. Yes, we have bone evidence and bananas to prove this. I don't think nature has rules, it has limitations. For instance, it is currnetly impossible to convert a human being into matter that would allow them to travel at the speed of light. Nature and the constant rotation of the Earth create Gravity, yet even with the limitations of Earth, we can still break it's opposing push with massive amounts of energy extracted from Earth. They haven't always been there. The Earths creation has been traced down to about 5 billion years. Besides, if all your theories that you knew could be answered and twisted into your own words were correct. Now I have a question for you. What came first: God or god? Answer that Christians (and whoever else is out there) "Also, I can read too. It's sad you say you're taking Psychology classes but you fail to understand my statement. I'm taking Psychology too, but you honestly can't think basic knowledge in the subject can help you determine peoples reasoning for believing what they do. School just started for nearly everyone, and even if you're in college, it's still too soon for you to be basing your knowledge of people views on psychology." True, but you can easily analyze people o the debate forms. And your right, he won't necessarily be able to answer my question either. Besides bringing up "God is...blah blah blah." However, my question takes more logic than his conclusion. Yes pepsi, I ignored that part as well because it was ridiculous, irrelavent, and hurricanes form many days over water before they can begin their destruction. So this sudden mirace is bull, and hating gays is ridiculous because Your "God" created these people and Jesus said "Love thy neighbor", not " Love thy neighbor unless he's gay, black, Jewish, etc." You are... Hmm. You are indescribable Erico.
This paragraph is the only one out of the whole thread that ticks me off. Do you actually think God hates gays? I'll wait until you answer this. Damn, took the response from right under me. Literally.
ER1C0, do you believe in coincidence when something strange/awkward happens? Or do you base it solely of your religious preferences?
What? When have you ever seen water turn into wine? A sea turn to blood? Or a zombie? Or a blind man suddenly see? Have you seen, or even heard of these things happening NOT in the bible? You have still yet to give proof Jesus even had powers. At least one of those is explainable. If the plagues in Egypt really had happened, the more possible, plausible explanation is the death of all of the fish in the water, or the sediments of the water base discoloring the water. These caused by the previous plagues. At least I figure that is what you were referring to. Now riddle me this: A chef puts a meal in the oven. As he goes to put it in, he realizes that the recipe had too much of one ingredient, and it was doomed to fail. Despite this, he places the food into the oven, it bakes, and comes out horrible. For this, the chef grows angry, and burns the ruined meal. The chef knew very well that his creation would fail, yet he still went about cooking it, and when it failed due to his own faults, he doomed it to a fiery demise. Does this situation sound familiar?
First off, i am christian, and you offend ME. i dont wouldn't want anyone to mix me up with you, ever. second, that first statement you made might just be the embodyment of why ignorance is so prevailent in this day and age. Religion is a wonderous thing for the individual; it can open up the mind, give people hope, give people a reason to LIVE. The worst way religion is used is to beat people into blind following and conformity: i mean, what is the point of believing in something if you have never questioned it? how do you know that its true for yourself? whenever anyone asks about my faith, i can have confidence because i have given it considerable thought, not just accepted what the guy who came before me supposed. I doubt you could say the same thing about yourself. Last: i love the way you assume you are only argueing against Atheists.
Jeez, a little harsh are we? That really got me down.. so I offend you because you think I don't have faith? Because you think I assume to argue against only atheists? That's why you dislike me? That's not even being Christian. A Christian would at least try and help, not judge other. Yea, I'm kind of being a hypocrite when I say that, but I'm trying to stop offending people if it means I'm offending my religion. Now for my defense, tell me about being a true Christian when you're the one judging me after all... and I don't hate anybody because I know there's hope and just because I'm defending something and getting at it in different ways doesn't mean I'm too stubborn to realize anything.. I see how you might see me as stubborn, but at least I'm willing to accept it, and it really hurts when you say I'm offending Christianity. Um.. are you saying God hates me? Both I think God doesn't want gays to become pastors. That's why I said gravity is the result of a large mass. You're saying animals didn't have curiosity and fear at one time? Do you think our first ancestors didn't have curiosity OR fear? Well, then how did they advance... at all? Without curiosity and fear we'd all be long dead. I do. There's only one answer. uhh... yea, make that a tornado lol...
That's funny, because god doesn't want gays to become pastors as well. He also wants them dead. Do you want gays dead ERICO? He's pointing out (correct me if i'm wrong Pigglez) that if god were omnipotent, he'd be responsible for every bad thing that ever happens, as well as our flaws. Basically, either god is sadistic and evil, or he isn't omnipotent. http://www.forgehub.com/forum/debates/48913-god-275.html#post1014331 Could you erase the four "quotes" that you've attributed to me, because I never said those things.
No, I'm not saying God hates you. However. If God exists, he is said to be Omniscient. My biggest concern with this God is that he is either evil or lazy. Let me explain. God is omniscient. That means he knows EVERYTHING. Everything to ever be, is, or will be. Anything to happen at all. Things like the location of each dustmite in the world right now, if you want to get meticulous about it lol. He also knows how your life will play out, and how you die, and where you will go (heaven or hell). He has and always has known these things, since millions of years ago. The people in life that go to hell... he created them, and let them be born, KNOWING far ahead of time that they'd fail his test of life and send them to hell. Yet he created them anyway. So that's why he is either evil or lazy. If he creates them anyway because he can and he is God and 'he cannot be judged' or something, then he is evil for condemning people to hell before they were born. He is lazy if he knew it, and is omnipotent and has the ability to stop this, but doesn't anyway. My question is, is this right? Is it right to do this? Now once, I had this question in a debate on another forum and the person replied that the point of life is that you can change from your ways and convert. Basically, he argues that If your life is moving on Path A, and that path is a path straight to hell, then you can always switch, and end up at Path B. (The Christian Path or something) In that case, it'd look like this: -----Path A------\ -----Path B-----Heaven My argument however, is that to an omniscient being, there is no past, present or future, because you always have known how each thing in time will happen. If you are the person that follows that switching style life, then that is no surprise to God. He knew it since the time Dinosaurs lived that you'd do that. And so to a God, that life looks like this: --------The Path-------Heaven. There is no sudden change, because unlike in the persons perspective where that change was sudden and unforseen, God knew itd happen. You are not changing destiny, or utilizing free will. You are just following your path through life. Trying to change it is part of the plan. So the point of it all is, God always knows how your life will turn out. The perceived free will we have is our always has been destiny to God. Is it fair he is creating people he knows before birth will go to Hell? Is there a point to living a life when God knows where you will end up anyway. Knowing how people would end up, why doesn't God do away with life already, and send everyone where they were heading and people wouldn't have to go through a life that is like a lame appetizer compared to the endless wonders of the Heaven we'll have afterwards. Seems a waste to me, looking at it that way. (It's not the way I view life, I'm just saying, if God exists, then his omniscience sort of makes me wonder why life is necessary?) Why are Gays so bad? Why do you follow an morally inferior God that hates his own creation when it is he who creates them homosexual. It is a gene, not a choice. Ask any homosexual person and they'll tell you they didn't choose to be Gay. The same way you are naturally attracted to the opposite sex, they are naturally attracted to the same one. Why would a Gay pastor be bad even? What is going to happen? If God wants everyone to love him, he shouldn't shun some. EDIT: Yea Scarecrow, you mostly got what I was saying there. XD
How I Feel About This Debate Characters: ER1C0: Person A: Person B: Person C: Person D: Person E: Person F: Person A: I was at the store and I saw a picture of a pink horse on the wall. Then I went to my friend’s house and he said horses aren’t pink. I don’t believe him because I saw actual proof that horses are pink. ER1C0: First of all, you’re assuming that all horses are pink because you saw an image of one horse. Second, you’re also assuming this picture is correct. Person A: No, you’re assuming too much. You say I’m assuming but you don’t have proof that they aren’t pink. ER1C0: Horses are not pink. They usually come in many shades of brown and white. Source: Horse Colors Person A: Yea, but why did I see a picture of a pink horse then? It’s at 50/50 because I saw the horse with my actual eyes and you’re just posting random links. ER1C0: Again, you only saw the picture of the horse, not the actual horse. The “random link” shows the many colors of horses and how they inherit genes from their parents. Let me ask you a question: Do you see any pictures of pink horses on that site? Person B: You’re stubborn because you’re too stupid to see that many horses are pink. ER1C0: Please don’t make this personal, and you’re basing your argument off of opinions. Please AT LEAST provide a link. Person A: I doubt you’ve even seen a horse. ER1C0: I actually live in the city and haven’t seen one… Have you seen a horse? Person A: Yea, I saw a pink horse just today, stupid. ER1C0: For the third time, you saw a picture of a pink horse, not an actual horse. Person B: [wikipedia link] ER1C0: Wikipedia is not a good source because many random people can edit it. Person B: NO! It is definitely a good source because it has moderators and they edit it. ER1C0: But there’s still a chance of it being a false statement. Person C: Horses are pink because I saw that same picture and I’ve seen google pictures of pink horses, I saw a TV show with a pink horse, and I’m pretty smart so I know what I’m talking about. /thread ER1C0: JUST BECAUSE YOU SAW A PICTURE OF A PINK HORSE DOES NOT MAKE ALL HORSES PINK!! Person C: You’re stupid. ER1C0: Okay…… You mind backing yourself up, next time? Person A: I know, Person C! He’s just too stubborn to get it. Person B: You still haven’t replied to my link. ER1C0: Calling me stupid won’t help this debate. AND yes, I already replied to your unreliable source, Person B. Person D: I goez to collaaag and I learntd that the horses are pink because my professor said they were was. ER1C0: Please learn how to spell, and you’re just assuming things… and why would your teacher say that horses are pink? That doesn’t make sense. Person A: Yea, Person D is right. And you’re just being stupid, ER1C0. Person D: You probobbly go to 3rd grad so shut up. ER1C0: I’m actually in High School and MY teacher said horses can be pink if someone inserts several genes into their DNA, but it’s highly unlikely that they will actually become pink because of this. It’s like 1 in a million or something. Person D: Just because your High School teaatcher saied it don’t meen it’s true. You’re to stubborn to think outside your littal barrier becaussse you is arrogant. ER1C0: Stop basing your arguments off of opinions. This debate should have ended a long time ago and you guys are just really making me mad. Person A: ER1C0’s stupid. Person B: You didn’t reply to my link, ER1C0. Person C: I SAW PINK HORSES SWIMMING ON TV!!! Why don’t you get it? I doubt you could even explain it because you’ve never seen a horse. ER1C0: I understand how YOU guys might think I’m stupid because I’ve never seen in a horse in real life. I have, however, seen horses on News programs, reliable internet sites, and a couple of my cousins live on a ranch and have never seen a pink horse in their entire life. Person A: Shut up, ER1C0, you just don’t get it. I saw this horse, and many people have seen this horse, and I’ve never seen a brown horse… So I don’t see how you’re right. Person B: I even gave him a link. Person C: I’m done with this debate because ER1C0’s a retard. Person D: I goez to collaaaage. ER1C0: Wow, I don’t think you guys are reading my posts. This is just so dumb. JUST because you’ve seen a pink horse in a picture does not make the whole population of horses pink. I gave you a source and it seems as if you guys don’t want to read it at all, so in reality you guys are being stubborn and arrogant. Oh yea, and Person A, stop telling me to shut up. This is a debate, stop making it personal. Person A: Sorry if you’re the retard. Person B: I read your link and it says horses are pink. Person C: All I hear from ER1C0 is blah blah blah blah. Person D: COLLLAAAAGGGEEE!!!! Person E: Wow, this debate is so retarded. ER1C0 is correct. Not all horses are pink, you guys... and ER1C0’s already explained this several times. Person A: But you don’t have undeniable evidence that all horses aren’t pink. ER1C0: Thank you so much, Person E. These kids just don’t get it. @ Person B: Where did you read that horses are pink? And, Person A, you don’t have undeniable proof that horses ARE pink… so either way, that argument doesn’t work. Person A: Shut up, horses are pink and you’re too stubborn to get that through your thick head. Go away or shut up. Seriously, you are so closed-minded and you probably don’t even have a job. ER1C0: What does having a job have to do with anything…? Person D: COOOOLLLLLLAAAAAAAAGGGGGGEEEEEEEEE!!!!!! Person C: I’m out of here, this is stupid. Person B: No, ER1C0 you don’t get it. We’ve actually seen a horse that’s pink and you haven’t. Why don’t you actually try researching the topic before entering this debate again. ER1C0: Wow, I’m so irritated right now. This debate is so exhausting and it seems as if you guys can’t get it across that not all horses are pink. In fact, only 1 in a million horses are, but just because you saw one, does not mean all horses are pink. Person D: AUUUGHGHHG NOOO!!! You iz stupidz ER1C0. Just leavzz this debate. Person F: I dun get erico, he r just stupidddzz.. The End So on that note, I'm leaving this debate because we aren't going anywhere and you guys are just WAAY too exhausting.
Okay..... any amount of mass beholds gravity..... So why's this? My point is that there are boundaries and "natural" things that are just there and don't have beginnings... so I think God had a part in this. No more putting words in my mouth. I'm going, so uhh... have fun.
Erico, that's an incredibly childish interpretation of the debate. Not only have you pegged everyone who debates against you on the obvious "wrong" side, but you're trying to peg yourself as the "suffering hero", which is kind of pathetic. If you truly are going ER1C0, good for you, power to you.