I’m not, did you read my note at the bottom saying that these aren’t my actual views, just a way of looking at it?
My point is, that you don’t need a scientist to prove that only the people who believe can see it. It’s just common sense and a little psychology. If you believe in it, you see it. Therefore, whether it’s real or not, only the believers appear to be seeing it.
Even if it’s real, the believers are still more likely to see it. It’s the idea of how something in camouflage works. There are a lot of times where if you are looking for the hidden object and know what you are looking for, you don’t have much trouble finding it. However, if you aren’t looking for anything specific, it just passes by without ever registering.
So either way, whether real or not, it just makes sense that “only the believers” would see him.
I know you guys are talking about the playlist I made that has videos about news reports and conversions due to Eucharistic Miracles. If you want to “prove it wrong,” study the sources. Don’t judge a video without seeing it just because the video is on Youtube.
@DT:Yes, I read it. and your note doesn’t have the relation to the first two paragraphs that I mentioned. Your basic statement that it makes sense that only believers can see, or are more inclined to see is a very good example of the problems with religion in general. The requirement, or predisposition of a person not to believe or think the way they do. I’m not saying that proof is needed, but from one religion to the next, there is nothing within our perspective range to separate on set of dogma apart from any other. The idea that as a group of beings with their primary interpretation of the world around them is deductively based on reactionary response to stimuli, only to throw that out the window creating a way to explain the world they live in is preposterous.
Blind faith is flawed a flawed tool for us as a species.
Just because I can’t initially see a camouflaged object doesn’t mean that there isn’t ways to prove there is something there.
MY POINT is that if something is to be taken seriously at this stage of human existence there needs to be some for of tangible reason why I shouldn’t just disregard it as untrue. I perceive my world as logically as I can based on my understanding and perspective. If I am expected to throw that all away because you have faith in something I have no perception of, and no real way to even detect the existence of, I’m afraid the answer is no. If humans were to accept everything in such ways we couldn’t survive day to day life.
This is not evidence. I could make a video with the same amount of reason about unicorns. Whether that’s interesting or not doesn’t matter. Also, a video on youtube means nothing. Videos and images can easily be edited, and unless you give me the sources to the news stories from actual newspapers and not blogs it proves nothing.
Honestly, I don’t even know how to respond to that without making it sound like I’m attacking you. It was a general comment, it wasn’t aimed at anyone specifically. As was Ramirezoid’s original comment. I haven’t seen Soup be anything but diplomatic. :hmph:
Gee wiz, you would think you guys are Christianphobic or something with as much posturing that you do about this topic. Ya’ll know I am a Christian, yet you don’t see me slapping a scripture verse on the end of each of my posts do ya? Why cant we all just get along without having to have a constant debate over this?
How about evidentiary process?
How about explanation as to how I can perceive anything tangible in any sense?
How about some sort of respect for the benefit to earthy humanity?
I would just appreciate some sort of reason that god is different than some crazy person sitting at a desk telling me there is a duck on their desk, when there isn’t.
Is there any reason out there not to think people who say they have spoken to, or have seen god, or had holy experiences aren’t just crazy?
You know not even 10 years ago that athiesm was being taught in Canadian high schools as deviant behavior?
I hate this argument, can’t stand it. It’s not an argument at all! What does it even mean “at this stage of human existence”? Just because we grow civilized, suddenly we aren’t permitted to just have faith or a whole bunch of other things?
So, just because there isn’t proof it does in fact it exists, it must not exist? Science doesn’t ANYWHERE say that God cannot possibly be real. If anything, a lot of theories actually go side by side with Biblical text when read the correct way.
Evolution Theory - Genesis = Not exactly word for word, but both follow the exact same pattern of existence. Earth, Water, Plants, Sea Animals, Land Animals, Man.
Big Bang Theory - Genesis = Both literally say the same thing. “God said let there be light” and boom there it was. Big Bang Theory just says that matter was there and exploded, but doesn’t know why. Throw God into the mix and it makes perfect sense.
These are the 2 obvious ones I can think of. My point is that if anything, science theories currently on some level support a lot of what religion has to say.
I don’t have the time or know where to being looking, but there are plenty of scientific views that try to explain that evolution is false and my friend never stops nagging me about the fact that Darwin’s own definition proves itself false. He mostly enjoys pointing out that the peacock couldn’t have evolved.
Also keep in mind that a lot of these scientific “facts” that people try to use to say religion is false are not facts but theories. Even in science, there is very very very little that can be truly proven 100%, so most of the stuff you hear from scientists is just as likely as a lot of the stuff in Biblical text.
I have seen these threads more times in my life than I care to count, and they ALWAYS go this way. I have seen friendships lost over crapola like this. I mean REally guys… I think we ALL can benifit with a little tolerance eh?
I wont kill the thread, but I will probably avoid it as well. I prefer to wub you guys rather than feel hurt at the things you say about Christians and lumping me in with some lunatics.
The problem with that explaination is that it assumes that evolution is always going forward. This is meant to be the theoretical truth, but in reality evolution is a lot more complex and random. Cells can mutate and create brand new appendages which do nothing but persist because they don’t create a verg big disadvantage either. Hell, some things just come about because of sheer luck.
You’re all forgetting that you can’t prove whether (a/the) God(s) exists or not. Proof denies Faith. Without Faith (a/the) God(s) are nothing. So setting out to prove if s/he/it/they exist is pointless, cos if you did prove it, they would simply cease to exist.
I don’t believe, I never have believed, and I severely doubt I ever will. Simply because I have not seen any evidence to suggest the existence of any “supreme being”. I also don’t believe because a lot of religions spout some of the most incredibly racist/homophobic/sexist/hypocritical bullshit that I’ve ever encountered.
That’s what’s the shame is, Cats. I’m trying to be as diplomatic and reasonable as I can about this.
I guess I’ll have to take the plunge into the Great Offtopic, since that’s where this thread now lives…
Before I start off, please, please, please remember that I’m not criticising, or questioning belief, this is legitimate curiosity.
My problem is that I can’t comprehend why people are religious, in purely mental terms. Not in a malicious way, I hasten to add. For example, sure, using science, one can’t prove there isn’t some kind of meta-being in charge of existence. What I don’t understand is how people believe in one religion and not another. You see my problem? I went from Christian, agnostic, atheist. I reached my agnostic phase because I felt that there was some force that couldn’t be proven, but beyond that I was lost: I didn’t know which religion I deemed correct because all I knew was this ‘force’.
at this stage depicts our current range of perception. Hell if we evolve some new form of perception and suddenly we can perceive the hidden divine world, then things would change in an instant.
Yes, asking humans to ignore their fundamental functions, when there is not one shred of reason to chose one set of dogma over another is just ridiculous.
The whole point of the thread seems to have been one person being asked to partake in an others belief system. You can believe whatever you want based on faith. Faith in something without anything tangible is personal. I don’t think it should be something that creates anything like religion. There shouldn’t be a church of belief systems. At best, there should be works of thought provoking personal discovery that gain acclaim because of how it can influence people into thinking more.
When talking about belief it seems dangerous to use definitive. If there was a religion I could respect, it would be one that accepts the unavoidable personal nature of belief. Something that poses questions, and ideas to me to make me think, and passively influence my life.
“God said let there be light”…okay, really? Are you sure? There is a lot in the bible I flat out think are counter to being a good person. There is a lot in there I think is beneficial to how one should live their life. Unfortunately there is a great deal in every religion that dictates that picking and choosing what seems right can’t be done. In none I’ve come across it’s preached, not explained or put to me to decide based on reasonable ideals.
It is what it is.
I’m not saying I even believe everything about science. However, there is so many ideas and open avenues for change that it is something I feel I relate more to. there is theories I don’t feel cover everything, and some I have ideas about being altogether wrong. But it’s not religion, and that means there is nothing required of me. It’s just observations and conclusions based off it. If a scientist comes to my door and step by step shows me things and poses truths and ideas I can get behind I may believe his conclusions until something seemingly more correct comes along.
Some religious fellow comes to my doors and tells me things in his book are this way and can’t come up with any real world reason why these things are true I will not believe him. For all I know he’s as crazy as any other person who says I must believe them in their claims, but can’t back it up in any way.
TL;DR - Faith should be personal. Coming to me and claiming your ideals to be what I should follow without presenting anything I can relate to or perceive is no more right to me than any other unproven statement made to me. You want me to believe? Why?
Personally I don’t push atheism on religious folks. I don’t want to convert people, because it’s obvious their ideals lie elsewhere. I just pang at them accepting a religion because it isn’t their ideals it’s someone other then themselves they are accepting. These people I will pose thoughts hoping it entices them to think for themselves and come up with their own perception. Ideas and personal beliefs should be something you take. there is no need to push.
I’ve seen a lot of just accept what other people believe.
A. It’s human nature to forve what you think is right on others, you are doing it to when you suggest non-conflict. That’s what you think is right, and you’re forcing it on people.
B. Religion, maybe not all religion, but a lot of it, causes misconceptions that hurt society
C. It is extremely annoying to here someone dismiss things and go on and on about the wonder and greatness of a god that doesn’t exist
Founded in 2004, Leakfree.org became one of the first online communities dedicated to Valve’s Source engine development. It is more famously known for the formation of Black Mesa: Source under the 'Leakfree Modification Team' handle in September 2004.
