which god?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Oil tanks to 30's and fighting breaks out...that's RELIGULOUS!
- Thread starter rc5781
- Start date
Can you explain what you mean? As things stand that idea sounds a lot like religion's lack of logic.Quote from jem:
Note - I said - the author was pretty damn smart. MVIC's question was dealt with in the garden of eden story.
But, I do think it was pretty smart to place answers to the most difficult questions man can pose - in the Garden of Eden.
Why the suffering?
Then the story of the serpant - tempting adam and eve with the promise that they would be like Gods.
Do you know that and sex are the probably the biggest sales pitches in history.
Most eastern religions are founded on the thought - the entire new age movement.
It is the pitch behind most of the secular movements - thorugh good government and good citizenship we can evolve to garden and eden type life. utopia.
I did not say adam and eve lived 5000 years ago. I have no reason to. That number is not in the bible.
How does it deal with anything MVIC said in his excellent post.
The Garden of Eden was far from utopia. According to the myth, it took just two people through no fault of their own , to spoil everything and bring the supposed Eden perfection to an end . That's not utopia. Strange notion to base any religion on. Good government should not really be based on tricks of that type or the complete lack of available information which is what Adam & Eve suffered within Bible mythology.
Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God really say, 'You must not eat from any tree in the garden'?"
Gen 3:2 The woman said to the serpent, "We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden,
Gen 3:3 but God did say, 'You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.' "
Gen 3:4 "You will not surely die," the serpent said to the woman.
Gen 3:5 "For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."
Gen 3:6 When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it.
------------------
This is a pretty powerful piece of literature.
Instead of engaging MVIC type criticism with a Q and A, the author of this book anticipated it and provided the answers in a very interesting story.
The bible is filled with similar wisdom thorughout. it must have been authored by some very very smart people if not inspired.
Gen 3:2 The woman said to the serpent, "We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden,
Gen 3:3 but God did say, 'You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.' "
Gen 3:4 "You will not surely die," the serpent said to the woman.
Gen 3:5 "For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."
Gen 3:6 When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it.
------------------
This is a pretty powerful piece of literature.
Instead of engaging MVIC type criticism with a Q and A, the author of this book anticipated it and provided the answers in a very interesting story.
The bible is filled with similar wisdom thorughout. it must have been authored by some very very smart people if not inspired.
I was going to mention Ben Stein as well - since he is a good "other side" to Bill Maher.
Maher made the film "Religulous" - while Stein made the film "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed" - where they take opposite sides.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religulous
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expelled:_No_Intelligence_Allowed
They are both frequent guests on CNN's Larry King show - although Ben Stein appears more often and as a political pundit.
Religious or not - it's all about commoditizing and showbusiness, isn't it... hehe. Make money on all sides and create debates.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religiosity
As for humanism - "secular humanism" is something some identify with.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_humanism
Maher made the film "Religulous" - while Stein made the film "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed" - where they take opposite sides.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religulous
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expelled:_No_Intelligence_Allowed
They are both frequent guests on CNN's Larry King show - although Ben Stein appears more often and as a political pundit.
Religious or not - it's all about commoditizing and showbusiness, isn't it... hehe. Make money on all sides and create debates.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religiosity
As for humanism - "secular humanism" is something some identify with.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_humanism
I requested explanation. You've given non at all .Quote from jem:
Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God really say, 'You must not eat from any tree in the garden'?"
Gen 3:2 The woman said to the serpent, "We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden,
Gen 3:3 but God did say, 'You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.' "
Gen 3:4 "You will not surely die," the serpent said to the woman.
Gen 3:5 "For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."
Gen 3:6 When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it.
------------------
This is a pretty powerful piece of literature.
Instead of engaging MVIC type criticism with a Q and A, the author of this book anticipated it and provided the answers in a very interesting story.
The bible is filled with similar wisdom thorughout. it must have been authored by some very very smart people if not inspired.
Jack and the beanstalk Three Billy Goats Gruff and the Koran are just as powerful and inspirational as the Bible in wisdom and ideas they attempt to portray.
Please explain how a story which you give no explanation of contains any what you call answers at all.
Quote from Stosh:
True. Without religion, we can still have plenty of wars over land and borders, oil, money, political philosophy, trade restrictions, taxation, migration, on and on....
Good point.
Thousands of years ago humans had the problems of suffering, sorrow, anger, fear, violence, conning, cheating, lying, death, etc.
Today humans have the problems of suffering, sorrow, anger, fear, violence, conning, cheating, lying, death, etc.
Quote from Sniemiec:
True, but those are rational things to fight/debate over. Not irrational, imaginary beings of the mind.
A society without rational things to fight over is like a crazed psychopath without a .45.
Christ!
Quote from Mvic:
Is there a God, and if there is one what are his expectations for us and the way in which we conduct ourselves?
GoD has no expectations from what does not exist. So he has no expectations for how unicorns should act, or elves or men. The land of make-believe has no rules but what it makes up as it goes along.
On the other hand, the gOd of the big O expects you to believe in either:
A: it
B: it's effects
Either will do. Belief in either is superstitious. Everyone goes about rationalizing his superstition, unable to see the inconsistencies in his own arguments. This serves gOd, who thrives and survives on perpetual conflict. Conflict is like jet fuel for superstitious belief systems...like "the universe".
Man does not exist. Yet he rationalizes as if he did. Is the inconsistency not apparent? If it is not apparent, consider that the gOd of the big O controls 99.99999% of thinking, which goes to validate [ie. "realize"]:
A. it
B it's effects
In this relationship, man is a slave, and gOd is the master. Believe it or not. Believe it not, and get what you always got. If you see men and women, you believe in the gOd of the big O. And every dose of O validates the existence of "O gOd!" and/or its effects.
Not possible man can be a tool? Think again...if you can.
Christ!