What is with all the "Christianity-Debunking" attempt threads?

reply to post by undo


just as you'll find that the church and christians use this same thing when anyone questions thier authority.. and it pisses them off when it is shown that they are full of it.. back in the day the curch called it heresy, being a witch, and anything else to keep their positions.. even the bible states this.. but of course thats typical picking and choosing that goes hand in hand with placing themselves above anyone who dont agree with them.. and it still goes against the US constitution.. but thats ok i guess the christians can do what ever they want and to hell with reality and anyone else .. and you wonder why they get so much crap from everyone else.. its cool that they can live as they believe and i can live as i believe as long as i believe as they do??? marriage was around long before christians, jews and muslims.. it is not and never was thiers they adopted marriage from the other cultures that came before..

reply to post by undo


and what praytell would those other reasons be???
would love to hear this

reply to post by scorand


i already said it. some view it as unnatural or they have an aversion to it for whatever reason. maybe they were sodomized as children and hate the entire concept. you NEVER know why. the reasons are many. how many more do you need?

Originally posted by Wertdagf
Badmedia you to rely on an opinion that your extra dementional "soul" interacts with your brain to create consiousness as you know it. Many people do not believe in this "soul".

Well it's not actually an opinion. But I can't prove such things to you, anymore than I can prove something is the color blue to a blind man. I don't blame the blind man for not being able to see the color blue, but if the blind man wants to argue with me that the color blue is just an opinion and isn't real just because he can't see it, then what is the point? So I can sit around and argue over if it's fact or opinion, if it's belief or knowledge and so on and we won't get anywhere. So I just go ahead and call it opinion and belief for these reasons. Really, it just then becomes a matter of credibility, when there should be none.

To simply believe me or give me credibility is the same thing that is wrong with Christians. And to simply deny that I have experienced such is also that which is wrong with Christians. So when I say these things are no different, this is why.

So for me, it's not a matter of getting people to believe anything. Blind belief is the problem to begin with. The point is to get people to think of things on a higher level, to understand things on a higher level. To take an honest and unbiased perspective of things. Then belief is not needed, because belief is replaced by understanding and knowledge.

Buddha said -- Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.

I think the most importanat question is whether or not you include evolution into your understanding of the "soul". If you do indeed understand and accept evolution then that would mean that "souls" form through natural processes in this reality throughout the universe.

I have no problem with evolution and don't think it goes against the bible. I fail to see the controversy, the topic to me seems more like a diversionary war over if God exists and so on. It's like the Vietnam war in the cold war.

I write programs for a living, and my programs evolve over time. I use the building blocks and libraries from previous programs into the next, and I see these same things in life/evolution. And I see DNA is simply a configuration file among a single type of program(human). The body is a machine, no doubt about it. However, the question is if you are defined by your body.

To what are the sense provided to? To what is the image your eyes collect presented to? What does it mean to be the observer. These questions and answers to them are not new, most people just don't even think about it. It's like they aren't aware that they are aware. When you become aware of how special and unique it is to be aware at all, then you will understand what I mean towards soul. In the end, there is only 1 true observer, and that is the father/god.

Seeing as how organic material just rains form the skies.... that make sthe universe look much more disturbing in terms of life on other planets.

No question there is other life out there. This as well I do not see the big deal in.

I'm not someone who just accepted the bible, I'm not brainwashed and I'm not ignorant. I have no problems with science or religion(philosophy really if you actually understand religion). But each has their proper places. Science is great in the realm of action and reaction, where things are repeatable and can be used as a tool. Religion and philosophy is about trying to understand what it means to be aware, what that part of us is, and how it exists in a reality of action and reaction.

All things in their proper places. I find those who embrace 1 or the other and can't see both in their proper places as equally foolish, and operating on a level of repeating what they are told by authority, rather than actually understanding things themselves.

And if you want to get down to it, religion and philosophical advances/understandings have been put on halt for the past 2000 years, science and technology have been allowed to strive, and now we are in a time where our technological capabilities are starting to outweigh our spiritual and philosophical understandings and it's dangerous. I think we can all see it. And these things have been halted by focus being put on idolatry instead of the understandings provided by the idol. And it is what those who do things in the name of the idol that we find ourselves in disagreement with today.

We don't argue over if a cell phone is a cell phone. But because people do not understand the truth that is being shown by the idol we argue over that. And when I look at Christians and those who argue against Christians, all I see is focus on the idol. On if the idol is true or not, if the idol is make believe or not. And to me this seems silly. I do not care if Jesus is real or not. It has nothing to do with the understandings given.

I long for a day when understandings are discussed rather than idols.

reply to post by scorand


I still have problems buying liquor on Sundays. Also, operating hours for various businesses are legally obliged to be closed on Sundays.

reply to post by badmedia


So then your admitting that the development of a brain precludes the arival of a "soul" and "free will" through evolution.

Would it then be to far of a stretch that the brain is indeed the "soul" and there is nothing metaphysical or extradementional about it.

Your blind man thing could be used as an example of telling somone that there is no soul as well. A blind man telling you what color something is.

You are saying that somone else is blind and not you, when it could just as easily be the other way around.

[edit on 8-2-2009 by Wertdagf]

reply to post by Hellish-D


funny considering the sabbath was a different day entirely. it's like i said before, what is being passed off as christian is not specifically christian. it's assumed to be christian but the assumption is based on papal decree. last i checked, jesus was jesus. pope was pope. two different individuals.

reply to post by Wertdagf


whew, i had one doozy of an out of body experience (in christian speak - a vision). i was not on drugs, and the physiological after effects, ended up effecting my children as well. they came out of their rooms where they had been playing (they were quite young) to complain that it felt like it was raining inside the house - like little pins and needles hitting their skin. i had manifested the same physiological reactions at the end of the out of body experience and hadn't said anything to them. so to say we don't have a part of us that can move threw space-time without our physical bodies, is incorrect, in my estimation.

reply to post by undo


Modern Christianity is based entirely on Catholic tradition. It bears no resemblance to what Christianity was before it was commandeered by the Romans. Easter, Good Friday, Christmas, church on Sunday, fish on Friday... It's all Catholic tradition. But you can't expect anything else since what you call Christianity was lost for nearly 2000 years.

Originally posted by Wertdagf
So then your admitting that the development of a brain precludes the arival of a "soul" and "free will" through evolution.

No, but understanding could perhaps come from that. I don't know that it's the development of the brain either, but rather the understanding and experiences that come from "time" itself.

The brain is always presenting and doing these things for something else, it's a tool for you. But it does not define you or what you are.

Would it then be to far of a stretch that the brain is indeed the "soul" and there is nothing metaphysical or extradementional about it.

I would say that the soul/consciousness resides in the brain. That is the connection point.

But how does electrical signals, chemicals and so on in the brain produce the ability to observer? Again, to what are these things presented to?

Your blind man thing could be used as an example of telling somone that there is no soul as well. A blind man telling you what color something is.

Entirely the point! You should not trust what anyone says, you must seek and experience and see it for yourself. All these things Jesus actually talks about if you can understand him. The virgin birth, being of god, son of god and so on is all actually about gaining and seeing these understandings about who and what you are.

If you accept it, then you are just following the authority that gave it to you. It's the blind leading the blind. You need to experience and understand it for yourself, which is something you have to seek and do for yourself.

You are saying that somone else is blind and not you, when it could just as easily be the other way around.

I can close my eyes and see what it looks like from the blind mans perspective. I can once again see myself as being my body, my brain and so on, rather than seeing myself as being consciousness/soul as well. As I can see your point of view as well as I my own, then I do not believe I am blind.

However, you make a good point. How does 1 blind man know that the person who is telling him everything is not also a blind man. He can't. And for this reason I think it is important that everyone must come to their own understandings, rather than accepting what is told to them by men. The only way that blind man could ever know is to see for himself.

reply to post by Hellish-D


sure i can expect something else. i can go to church or not go to church. i can go on sunday or saturday or friday or wednesday or have church in my home. i can pray by myself or with others. i can read the bible without a study guide and interpret it for myself or with a study guide. it's pretty cool. i can participate in traditions (christmas, easter, etc) or not participate. the traditions of our society that you mention are all papal decrees, meant to ecumenize and ease new cultures into the catholic church. i'm not catholic. of course, you already knew that. i read the bible alot. it's my area of research. that and the other ancient texts of the sumerians, akkadians, egyptians, and babylonians. so i don't think it's lost to me at all.

reply to post by badmedia

No, but understanding could perhaps come from that. I don't know that it's the development of the brain either, but rather the understanding and experiences that come from "time" itself. The brain is always presenting and doing these things for something else, it's a tool for you. But it does not define you or what you are.

So it is possible that the soul does not exist.

The collections of memories in your brain dictates your personality. The information youe brain absorbs and retains is used for decision making and understanding. If you were to remove these memories then those people would change thier behaviors. This is proven.....

"The brain is always presenting and doing these things for something else, it's a tool for you. But it does not define you or what you are."

What you said above is also just an opinion and a way for you to rastionalize and keep your idea of a "soul". It is possible that the "soul" exists beyond our reality ... it is possible that it doesnt and your brain contains everything you think and feel.

The brain has always been the tool of an oranism to store information from previous experiances and use it to further its survival by predicting patterns.

see this is all i wanted you to say.... im not the devil or a demon as you call so many other people who speak against your "beliefs".

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by scorand

 

i already said it. some view it as unnatural or they have an aversion to it for whatever reason. maybe they were sodomized as children and hate the entire concept. you NEVER know why. the reasons are many. how many more do you need?

most if not all of which are based ar the result of christian dogma and its treatment of the gay community.. i saw that the bible and such are you're area of research.. do u not see this as the case.. not to mention that the ( experts) claim that being gay is caused by said abuse... and u still havent answered my question.. as these reasons do not acount for what the religous groups have done in cali and other places.. they drew on social and church bias to push that agenda.. which is based on church dogma..

[edit on 8-2-2009 by scorand]

Originally posted by Wertdagf
So it is possible that the soul does not exist.

The collections of memories in your brain dictates your personality. The information youe brain absorbs and retains is used for decision making and understanding. If you were to remove these memories then those people would change thier behaviors. This is proven.....

But you are still overlooking what it is that gives us the ability to understand. See, I can write a program and it will react and act on the events based on it, but it can not actually understand.

Understanding is what allows you to not be subject to action and reactions.

I mean say if someone steals from a store. I don't just look at if the person stole, but I also look at why. If they haven't eaten in 3 days, they will be hungry and do such. However, these things are besides the point. I am talking about things like what actually makes understanding and observing possible, and what that means in the first place.

The brain is based on logic. Logic can not create consciousness. Rather, consciousness creates logic. Because consciousness gives understanding and so on.

Those things you mention define my experience, they do not define me. I am the rider, not the ride.

What you said above is also just an opinion and a way for you to rastionalize and keep your idea of a "soul". It is possible that the "soul" exists beyond our reality ... it is possible that it doesnt and your brain contains everything you think and feel.

Again why you need to have understanding. The brain operates on logic, it is a system and all systems operate on laws based on logic. And again, there is no logic that can create consciousness. As I have told you many times, if you can prove otherwise then you would have made the biggest discovery in the history of mankind, bigger even than intelligent and more advanced life on other planets. There is a reason they call it artificial intelligence, not just intelligence.

The brain has always been the tool of an oranism to store information from previous experiances and use it to further its survival by predicting patterns.

As is required for this experience.

see this is all i wanted you to say.... im not the devil or a demon as you call so many other people who speak against your "beliefs".

I've only ever referred to 1 person as a demon. And that reason had nothing at all to do with them speaking out against my "beliefs". That person knows who they are, that person knows the truth and denies it anyway for personal gain.

Originally posted by spitefulgod
Unfortunately due to the current climate, Christianity is the weakest of religions (you can't be branded a racist or anti-Semite by bashing it).

Current Climate? You wouldnt be talking about the near 1 Billion Catholics would you. Or the many Christians added to that?

How about the 1 Billions Muslims..plus?

The current climate is a world of believers, and a world in disbeileif.

The weakest of beliefs, is atheism. Belief in nothing, founded on the prospect of nothing.

Peace


[edit on 8-2-2009 by HIFIGUY]

Originally posted by John Matrix
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Which makes the judgement of Hell even less justified.
Not that it ever could be justified.
My initial reason for questioning the faith.
Once you question, your eyes become open.

reply to post by scorand


my position is that it is not right but it's not any less or more right than any thing else God told us not to do. some people it effects more dramatically. like in the case of male homosexuality... some straight men are revolted by the idea -- it actually makes them sick to their stomachs to even consider it. i will say this, however, if you love someone that can't be bad. it's only what you do with that love that counts, and that's apparently the case with the biblical definition of "acceptable" sex. it discourages all forms of sex in the new testament. whereas the old testament targetted adultery, bestality and sodomy, the new testament targets all of the above and heterosex too. it doesn't say you can't engage in hetero sex with a marriage partner, but that if possible, no sex is better than some sex.

Originally posted by undo
it doesn't say you can't engage in hetero sex with a marriage partner, but that if possible, no sex is better than some sex.

God must truely be cruel if he created sex and then tells us not to do it ...
That would be like a parent buying their son an xbox360 and telling them they can't use it - except for learning purposes, of course.

reply to post by TruthParadox


well i thought that was a rough one too but then i read some buddhist material about channeling sexual energy into goals you want to achieve. it dawned on me then that what the teaching was saying was... use your energies for prayer, meditation, healing the sick, caring for people that kinda thing. it's a rough life, no doubt, but i hear you can even beat addictions by rechanneling sexual energy.

Originally posted by undo
some straight men are revolted by the idea -- it actually makes them sick to their stomachs to even consider it. i will say this, however, if you love someone that can't be bad. it's only what you do with that love that counts, and that's apparently the case with the biblical definition of "acceptable" sex. it discourages all forms of sex in the new testament.

Actually its the old Testament with Sodom and Gomorrah and in the New Testament found within Romans.

Romans 1:

Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. 25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. 26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. 28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper

An aquisition of a sickness, blind to the reciever.

Peace


[edit on 8-2-2009 by HIFIGUY]