AuthorTopic: Official Off-Topic Thread  (Read 806961 times)

Offline Ben2theEdge

  • 0011
  • **
  • Posts: 503
  • Karma: +1/-0
  • I'ma drink mah coffee!
    • View Profile
    • My Deviantart Gallery

Re: Official Off-Topic Thread

Reply #350 on: January 27, 2009, 02:04:22 pm
Helm I can't at the moment respond to everything you wrote, but the foundation of your understanding people like me is flawed.
You begin by assuming that I invented God out of some kind of need I had. I didn't invent God at all. You have to prove I did because many of your beliefs are founded on that assumption. But as long as you do that, I won't make any sense to you.
« Last Edit: January 27, 2009, 02:12:23 pm by Ben2theEdge »
I mild from suffer dislexia.

Offline Panda

  • 0100
  • ***
  • Posts: 1008
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • 威風堂々
    • View Profile

Re: Official Off-Topic Thread

Reply #351 on: January 27, 2009, 02:27:55 pm
Color me interested in your reply to Helm's post.

Assuming you didn't receive your religious beliefs through family or location, what kind of experiences or situations made you realize the existence of a god?
And then, if you indeed realized that there is a deity over us, what made you choose a religion over the others, or at all?
« Last Edit: January 27, 2009, 05:18:05 pm by Panda »

Offline SolidIdea

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 120
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile

Re: Official Off-Topic Thread

Reply #352 on: January 27, 2009, 02:52:14 pm
Helm I can't at the moment respond to everything you wrote, but the foundation of your understanding people like me is flawed.
You begin by assuming that I invented God out of some kind of need I had. I didn't invent God at all. You have to prove I did because many of your beliefs are founded on that assumption. But as long as you do that, I won't make any sense to you.

That's kinda where I was trying to get at. But...
You did not invent God, that's true. There was something inside you (and all of us for the matter), maybe since you gave your first steps, that would answer your questions, and question your answers. A "self" not tangible even by the ultimate grasps of conscience which makes even stranger to us that it's called a self.
This imbroglio can evolve into many things such as faith, the relation of your self with the self of others, which may be very true the God inside of all.
I guess what Helm is trying to, is to get an answer (the need he believes you had) that determines the turning point or realization of the presence/existence of a God.
That's a valid and fair questioning even though something like that is hard to pinpoint since most of the time is a road of events (life, difficulties faced in, problems, joys, questions answered or not). That's why I said he isn't trying to understand, it takes a lot more than the 2 to substitute x in 1 + 1 = x.

EDIT:
Just so it doesn't see like I went over Helm's reply:
The risky questions as exemplified are as complicated as it gets. It's like question "how did we get here?" and hoping for an answer that suits.
A scientist can go as far as the creation of the cosmo, but before that there wasn't?
I see you are genuinely interested in seeing a reasoning behind his faith, but first you should be aware that this goes far beyond if god is thermodinamically (sp?) possible or not.
« Last Edit: January 27, 2009, 03:29:34 pm by SolidIdea »

Offline Helm

  • Moderator
  • 0110
  • *
  • Posts: 5159
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • Asides-Bsides

Re: Official Off-Topic Thread

Reply #353 on: January 27, 2009, 04:05:30 pm
Ben take your time, if you ever have it, to paint me a picture. I sincerily can't see how an idea of a God as strictly defined as that of the christian faith can occur to you naturally, I can only see it being socially impressed on you (which is what the 'invention' I'm talking about is). If I'm wrong I'd really like to see the alter apars more clearly.

Offline The B.O.B.

  • 0011
  • **
  • Posts: 699
  • Karma: +3/-0
  • currently losering it up...
    • View Profile

Re: Official Off-Topic Thread

Reply #354 on: January 27, 2009, 05:42:55 pm
   In this case, I always feel that discussing the battle between  Science and Religion is masturbatory. Everybody knows that the opposing sides go no where with it, and it's an endless battle. Conversing over it, I guess, just seems like something to do when you're bored, and never truly serves an endpoint, other than "we'll never agree with each other, but lets just keep on debating till we die." Just more questions, doubt in the other side, and in the worst case scenario(but a small percentage), anger and hostility. Granted, anger and hostility comes from religious FANATICS majority of the time, but it's never right to assume all religious people would do the same.
   To me, the basis of Science and Religion is really a challenge between knowledge and faith: ie, "I have faith that you will do this", will always combat " I KNOW that you will do this." Knowing something will happen, always seems to have a neutral connotation to it. Bad things can come of it, and so can good things come of it, but the point is, it was known to happen anyway. The brain is wired this way, we can't help it. It's kind of the same reasoning as something hitting you in the gut: if the hit is known prior, the brain will try to prepare itself chemically and mentally, before hand. If it isn't known, and the hit comes out of no where, the brain doesn't have time to prepare, and pain sensors sometime go into overload. Where as faith comes into play, it's a matter of wanting to believe that something will happen. That something is expected without so much factual evidence. Could be possible that what ever it is, it's happened before, you've seen it with your own eyes, but you EXPECT it to happen again, rather than KNOW. And this is the problem.
   Now I know religion, in terms of definition, is NOT the same thing as faith, more so partners in crime with each other. However, don't these debates seem to always end up against a brick wall at this point, when knowledge is challenged against faith? Both parties are equally intelligent enough to at least know that the 2 word's definitions are not one in the same, yet one or the other keeps asking why? Seriously an endless circle jerk of people who aren't seeing the greater picture here...and I mean the fanatics of BOTH sides, not just one.
   For the time being, however, it's much easier to pick on religion, as it's outdated, and has far less firmware upgrades than that of Science. Science isn't totally perfect, however. It just has a better way of answering it's previous flaws and wrong answers by calling it's current statements "theories." It's kind of like saying "this is the answer for now, until proven wrong later on. If someone challenges us, we'll just tell them it was a theory, and that it wasn't concrete to begin with, and prone to change with future updates."...Science has built itself fairly well on this concept and it works fine, to be quite honest. We've gotten modern medicine, technology, and healthier because of it. But again, it's not perfect either. After all, we once thought the world was flat, and look what happened there(I know, I know, it's an easy target...but I had to ...).
   I guess to put it simply, I will agree with others in that Religion is flawed in many ways. It's also very hard to defend against a "science" man's perspective. But if there really is a true God out there, I'm sure our simple scientific theories will still NEVER fully understand it's entity and well being, or how it came into effect, probably because this God-like entity has been around for so long, that it's at a much higher intelligible level than we are. Also, I'm sure it moved on many billion years ago to other side projects, rather than dealing with a couple of living beings who debate over trite things such as this. I'm sure there are other living beings, possibly more advanced than us, that also have this same conversation, and also get no where with it. So I guess if it ever came down to it, and I were to meet this God, any question I would first ask him would probably have an answer something close to " Uhmmm, which Universe are you from again?"

*heh, such an abrupt sentence to end a long series of masturbatory paragraphs, that derive too far from the main subject. Oh the irony...*

my back hurts...

Offline Conzeit

  • 0100
  • ***
  • Posts: 1448
  • Karma: +3/-0
  • Camus
    • conzeit
    • View Profile
    • CONZEIT

Re: Official Off-Topic Thread

Reply #355 on: January 27, 2009, 05:58:50 pm
http://www.konjak.org/index.htm

Well done konjak, a ton of fun to play :)
QFT! very very good. I would eat up in an instant anything like that he released....too bad this kind of one man-treasure type thing never gets noticed on a wide scale in the web. Maybe he should make one where the hero is science and the bad guy is religion. That way he'd get all the fucking attention in the world.

Offline Rydin

  • 0011
  • **
  • Posts: 925
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • ...zzzt...
    • @thickDumps
    • View Profile
    • thickDumps

Re: Official Off-Topic Thread

Reply #356 on: January 27, 2009, 08:31:51 pm
I sincerily can't see how an idea of a God as strictly defined as that of the christian faith can occur to you naturally, I can only see it being socially impressed on you (which is what the 'invention' I'm talking about is).

Yes, and all feral children are literate and know modus ponens?  Some thing being socially impressed on you doesn't make it wrong does it?

I agree that most religion is unnecessarily intricate, though. 

If there is a biblical god, his creation of humanity shows that he knows a little bit about genetics; his living in the heavens shows that he knows something about space travel; his punishment of humanity and "thou shalt have no other gods" deal shows that he is power hungry and full of himself; nothing really too frightening or worship-worthy to me.  He's a dick--don't get me wrong, his vast knowledge of science is admirable--but I suppose there are dicks littered all about the universe. 

Modern science knows that everything is vibrating energy in one way or another. Lots of religions refer to this spiritually.  Maybe some other dude made all this vibrating energy, but its being multidimensional and mysterious and everything makes it very hard to even begin to comprehend. Something so incomprehensible is worth my attention.

There's two cents for y'all.
Man cannot remake himself without suffering for he is both the marble and the sculptor.

Offline SolidIdea

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 120
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile

Re: Official Off-Topic Thread

Reply #357 on: January 27, 2009, 09:21:55 pm
Not trying to deviate from the subject but...
Does anyone know any good books about watercolor and it's techniques?

Offline Emtch

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 157
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile

Re: Official Off-Topic Thread

Reply #358 on: January 27, 2009, 10:08:21 pm
All this fuzz about a little comic. It's the same with every forum I've ever been on, as soon as someone makes a religion joke people go batshit.

SO WHAT IF SOMEONE INSULTS YOUR IMAGINARY FRIEND?
Stop taking shit and decide for yourself whether or not to believe.

If people want to believe in an almighty being that creates it's own enemies and contradicts itself, the fine.
But don't get mad at us realists for believing in the suff that actually makes sense and that has proof it's correct.

Offline SolidIdea

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 120
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile

Re: Official Off-Topic Thread

Reply #359 on: January 27, 2009, 10:45:03 pm
All this fuzz about a little comic. It's the same with every forum I've ever been on, as soon as someone makes a religion joke people go batshit.

SO WHAT IF SOMEONE INSULTS YOUR IMAGINARY FRIEND?
Stop taking shit and decide for yourself whether or not to believe.

If people want to believe in an almighty being that creates it's own enemies and contradicts itself, the fine.
But don't get mad at us realists for believing in the suff that actually makes sense and that has proof it's correct.

I hate being rude but, shut up.
You clearly didn't read through the discussion and you are being the main offender here. Worst than going batshit over something, is going batshit over nothing which is clearly your case right here.