Religious/Evolutionary Debate Thread
- Thread starter QUALTHWAR
- Start date
-
Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.
I would say that’s not entirely true. In a way, agree, but in another way, I disagree. Although some people regroup and have faith that’s original, most people believe what they’ve been told all their lives.darth_weasel said:
No. Propaganda implies that people actually know the truth, but are disseminating false truth for one reason or another.Imagofer said:
Religion has more to do with having faith because their parents have told them it’s this way or that way. Then parents take them to church, or whatever, and they get told this and that. I think the church and the parents actually believe what they are saying, so propaganda is out the door. Well, maybe not so much the church. Church is big business. Have you ever been to a church where they didn’t pass around a collection plate?
Anyway, I think it has more to do with ignorance than propaganda.
Cat Fuzz
Qualthwar's Minion. Ph34r!
K, lets get one thing straight. I feel I must say this again. I am not Catholic. My church is VERY different. We are one physical church, independant from any larger organization. The church is run by the people that attend. Everyone in the church has a say as to what goes on. We have no official membership. There is no application to join. People come and go as they please. All Sunday school classes are taught by people that attend the church. We have three pastors, one secretary and a Board of Elders of which there are 12 people that are elected by the congragation. We pass the collection plate so that our staff can be paid and the lights don't get shut off. We also support many missionaries all over the world with financial support. Money given is completely voluntary and confidential. No pressure is ever given for people to give more than what the Holy Spirit leads them to give. By this method, my church has no debts and ends every single year in the black while at the same time maintaining our facilities very nicely.
Cat Fuzz said:
That's more or less how my church is, but it's Catholic. The Church part I didn't mind as a kid, boring, but...
Catholic school was where I got turned off the religious course.
Thing is, your freelance Christianity is more tight-knit it sounds like, rather than mainstream...which I like. Organized religion, however, is the biggest scam ever pulled on the human race.
Edit: Kinda seems like the Evolution vs Creationism part of this thread has passed on, and just shy of 20 pages. Nice work everyone
On a less serious note... did God design the man's butt hair as a counterpart to the women's painful childbirth ? In that case , much hate to him - it's the perfect combination of annoyingly constant slight pain and humiliation. Intelligent design ? Sadistic design yeah
QUALTHWAR said:
do you do any research before you post?
more scriptures from Genesis:
[5] And the waters decreased continually until the tenth month: in the tenth month, on the first day of the month, were the tops of the mountains seen.
[8] Also he sent forth a dove from him, to see if the waters were abated from off the face of the ground;
[9] But the dove found no rest for the sole of her foot, and she returned unto him into the ark, for the waters were on the face of the whole earth: then he put forth his hand, and took her, and pulled her in unto him into the ark.
[10] And he stayed yet other seven days; and again he sent forth the dove out of the ark;
[11] And the dove came in to him in the evening; and, lo, in her mouth was an olive leaf pluckt off: so Noah knew that the waters were abated from off the earth.
you mean to tell me an olive tree can grow in one week under such conditions?
"The olive tree is a slow growing tree which fills during the first 7 years of it's life. It is especially productive thought out her life. Growing to heights ranging from 10 to 40 feet (3 to 12 meters)"
http://www.theancientland.com/History Of The Olive Tree.html
again look up the Hebrew word for "pluckt off". It is taraph, which means "recently torn off, i.e. fresh". This is important because it shows that the olive leaf, or branch, was plucked off of a tree and not picked up off the ground or floating waters, for it takes a long time to grow an olive tree to the stature whereby a branch can be plucked from it.
that means this tree was growing and matured elsewhere, so the flood was not worldwide
Shadow, if I didn't have my religion, I'd probably be dead. I've had a couple of "traumatic" events in the last 3 years, and I don't think I would have ever found resolution if it were not met with inner peace and a sense of spiritual growth. To be brutally honest, I sometimes am surprised I'm still here, and I'm greatful for the amount understanding I have culled from my life, even if I'm not really happy, I'm alive and I owe a great deal of that to my faith - that part of me is essential.
The strange thing is, I got exactly the same solace by leaving a religion. It came from a lucid dream and a trance-like experience (Which the symbols in my avatar came from), but since then the calm I got has simply been a part of everyday life. I spent a while looking around at other religions, but saw only the same flaws that I perceived in Christianity. Nothing that has been branded "spiritual" or "religious" enters into it anymore.
Our higher psychological needs definitely reach towards development and some form of self-transcendence (and personally, I think that's deeply interrelated with aesthetic experience).
I recently read "Man's Ultimate Search for Meaning" by Viktor Frankl, and while I think a lot of what he says is rubbish*, later in the book he talks of existential angst, or lack of meaning, as a primary cause of people's lack of inner calm. Surprisingly to him, it's emerged that finding a meaning in life is by no means dependent on being religious; though that does help many people.
He explains it from his point of view (that a masculine higher being definitely exists), claiming that those who still find a meaning without God are simply finding him and mistaking him for a part of themselves. I would argue the opposite: that people are seeing something great in themselves, and mistaking it for another being. That greatness is usually buried under a lot of pathology (I suppose you can guess what the symbols in my avatar mean now; they're the design philosophy behind something I've been writing for the past 5 years).
Regardless, it seems that once people have glimpsed it, from whatever viewpoint, they spend a lot of their lives striving to get there.
* To paraphrase, "If we assume X and Y to be true, then things work like this. Thus, Z is a fact" <-- he does that a lot. In talking about human suffering he also quotes an argument that basically states: "If dogs could understand what vivisection is all about, they would nobly acquiesce to it".
Our higher psychological needs definitely reach towards development and some form of self-transcendence (and personally, I think that's deeply interrelated with aesthetic experience).
I recently read "Man's Ultimate Search for Meaning" by Viktor Frankl, and while I think a lot of what he says is rubbish*, later in the book he talks of existential angst, or lack of meaning, as a primary cause of people's lack of inner calm. Surprisingly to him, it's emerged that finding a meaning in life is by no means dependent on being religious; though that does help many people.
He explains it from his point of view (that a masculine higher being definitely exists), claiming that those who still find a meaning without God are simply finding him and mistaking him for a part of themselves. I would argue the opposite: that people are seeing something great in themselves, and mistaking it for another being. That greatness is usually buried under a lot of pathology (I suppose you can guess what the symbols in my avatar mean now; they're the design philosophy behind something I've been writing for the past 5 years).
Regardless, it seems that once people have glimpsed it, from whatever viewpoint, they spend a lot of their lives striving to get there.
* To paraphrase, "If we assume X and Y to be true, then things work like this. Thus, Z is a fact" <-- he does that a lot. In talking about human suffering he also quotes an argument that basically states: "If dogs could understand what vivisection is all about, they would nobly acquiesce to it".
Last edited:
diddlysquat
FlamingPsychoTrannyBitch
Okay, for those who take the bible literally, check the following:
001:026 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our
likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea,
and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over
all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth
upon the earth.
001:027 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God
created he him; male and female created he them.
Then, after the seventh day, once he had rested :
002:005 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and
every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had
not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man
to till the ground.
002:006 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole
face of the ground.
002:007 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and
breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became
a living soul.
002:008 And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there
he put the man whom he had formed.
So, he creates man and woman on the sixth day, then creates him again after the seventh day, along with rain? Hmm someones timeline is a bit mixed up, or there was more than one creation of man. Continuing the verses:
002:015 And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of
Eden to dress it and to keep it.
002:016 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of
the garden thou mayest freely eat:
002:017 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt
not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou
shalt surely die.
002:018 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be
alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
002:019 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the
field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam
to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called
every living creature, that was the name thereof.
002:020 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air,
and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not
found an help meet for him.
002:021 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he
slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh
instead thereof;
002:022 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a
woman, and brought her unto the man.
002:023 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my
flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of
Man.
002:024 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and
shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.
002:025 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not
ashamed.
So which is it? I mean he had already created beasts of the field etc, before he created man, but now he is creating them again, after man is created. Quite confusing isn't it, if you take it literally now, isn't it?
Now, after Cain slew Abel, the following occured:
004:009 And the LORD said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he
said, I know not: Am I my brother's keeper?
004:010 And he said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother's
blood crieth unto me from the ground.
004:011 And now art thou cursed from the earth, which hath opened her
mouth to receive thy brother's blood from thy hand;
004:012 When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield
unto thee her strength; a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou
be in the earth.
004:013 And Cain said unto the LORD, My punishment is greater than I
can bear.
004:014 Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the
earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a
fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to
pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me.
004:015 And the LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain,
vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the LORD set a
mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.
004:016 And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in
the land of Nod, on the east of Eden.
004:017 And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and
he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the
name of his son, Enoch.
So, what was this land of Nod? Who inhabited it that it would have a wife for him to marry? Or, did Adam send his daughters off to this land of Nod?
Jesus taught his diciples in parables and stories. It is not too great of a challenge to think that, in a pre literate society, where history and morality were taught through folktales and legends, where the oral tradition of passing on from one generation to the next was through memorization of the stroies told, that these tales would, once a society became literate, be written down and passed on from that point on. After many generations, the language changes, so the scrolls get rewritten into a new or into other languages, where, differences in them allow for different interpretations of words and phrases.
Case in point: (off a gay christian website)
Arsenokoitais
(1 Corinthians 6:9-10 and 1 Timothy 1:9-10)
1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (NAS)
"Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God."
1 Timothy 1:9-10 (NKJ)
"Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine."
I will group 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 and 1 Timothy 1:9-10 together for discussion purposes because the debate around each centers pretty much around the proper definition of one word - arsenokoitais (Strongs #733). The Greek word arsenokoitais has posed a problem for scholars throughout the years, as it appears to be a ‘slang’ word not commonly used. In fact it only appears twice in Scripture once in 1 Timothy 1:9-10 and again in 1 Corinthians 6:9-10.
Because of these translation problems we see these passages interpreted various ways. For instance the King James translates arsenokoitais in 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 as “abusers of themselves with mankind”, Worrell translates it as “sodomites” while the NIV, NAS and others translate it as “homosexuals”.
Arsenokoitais has the same translation problems in 1 Timothy 1:9-10. With the King James writing “them that defile themselves with mankind”, ASV is “abusers of themselves with mankind, New King James and Worrell say “sodomites”, NIV has “perverts” while the NAS and New Living write “homosexuals”. So who is right?
One thing is clear. That being that this interpretation debate is a relatively new one. For years these passages were always translated as ‘abuser of self” or “sodomite” (e.g. KVJ and Worrell). Because of the ambiguity of the literal meaning behind arsenokoitais the earlier Bible scholars felt an equally ambiguous ‘catch all’ word such as “sodomite” seemed appropriate enough. They and others since then have pointed out that if Paul wanted to specifically say “a homosexual man” there were certainly words in the Greek language to do so as homosexuality was a rather common practice in both the Greek and Roman cultures (Paul wrote his letters in the Greek language). Paul elected NOT to use these words and instead used the more ambiguous word arsenokoitais. So what DOES arsenokoitais mean?
Strongs (#733) doesn’t offer much help saying that the word means “sodomite” and “abuser of (that defileself) with mankind.” The same translations used by earlier versions of the Bible such as Worrell and King James (Note: these translations came out long before the current homosexual debate was raging and thus the Bible translators felt no compunction to have to ‘side’ with one group or another…).
Yeah inspired right?
001:026 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our
likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea,
and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over
all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth
upon the earth.
001:027 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God
created he him; male and female created he them.
Then, after the seventh day, once he had rested :
002:005 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and
every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had
not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man
to till the ground.
002:006 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole
face of the ground.
002:007 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and
breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became
a living soul.
002:008 And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there
he put the man whom he had formed.
So, he creates man and woman on the sixth day, then creates him again after the seventh day, along with rain? Hmm someones timeline is a bit mixed up, or there was more than one creation of man. Continuing the verses:
002:015 And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of
Eden to dress it and to keep it.
002:016 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of
the garden thou mayest freely eat:
002:017 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt
not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou
shalt surely die.
002:018 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be
alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
002:019 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the
field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam
to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called
every living creature, that was the name thereof.
002:020 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air,
and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not
found an help meet for him.
002:021 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he
slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh
instead thereof;
002:022 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a
woman, and brought her unto the man.
002:023 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my
flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of
Man.
002:024 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and
shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.
002:025 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not
ashamed.
So which is it? I mean he had already created beasts of the field etc, before he created man, but now he is creating them again, after man is created. Quite confusing isn't it, if you take it literally now, isn't it?
Now, after Cain slew Abel, the following occured:
004:009 And the LORD said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he
said, I know not: Am I my brother's keeper?
004:010 And he said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother's
blood crieth unto me from the ground.
004:011 And now art thou cursed from the earth, which hath opened her
mouth to receive thy brother's blood from thy hand;
004:012 When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield
unto thee her strength; a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou
be in the earth.
004:013 And Cain said unto the LORD, My punishment is greater than I
can bear.
004:014 Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the
earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a
fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to
pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me.
004:015 And the LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain,
vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the LORD set a
mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.
004:016 And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in
the land of Nod, on the east of Eden.
004:017 And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and
he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the
name of his son, Enoch.
So, what was this land of Nod? Who inhabited it that it would have a wife for him to marry? Or, did Adam send his daughters off to this land of Nod?
Jesus taught his diciples in parables and stories. It is not too great of a challenge to think that, in a pre literate society, where history and morality were taught through folktales and legends, where the oral tradition of passing on from one generation to the next was through memorization of the stroies told, that these tales would, once a society became literate, be written down and passed on from that point on. After many generations, the language changes, so the scrolls get rewritten into a new or into other languages, where, differences in them allow for different interpretations of words and phrases.
Case in point: (off a gay christian website)
Arsenokoitais
(1 Corinthians 6:9-10 and 1 Timothy 1:9-10)
1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (NAS)
"Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God."
1 Timothy 1:9-10 (NKJ)
"Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine."
I will group 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 and 1 Timothy 1:9-10 together for discussion purposes because the debate around each centers pretty much around the proper definition of one word - arsenokoitais (Strongs #733). The Greek word arsenokoitais has posed a problem for scholars throughout the years, as it appears to be a ‘slang’ word not commonly used. In fact it only appears twice in Scripture once in 1 Timothy 1:9-10 and again in 1 Corinthians 6:9-10.
Because of these translation problems we see these passages interpreted various ways. For instance the King James translates arsenokoitais in 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 as “abusers of themselves with mankind”, Worrell translates it as “sodomites” while the NIV, NAS and others translate it as “homosexuals”.
Arsenokoitais has the same translation problems in 1 Timothy 1:9-10. With the King James writing “them that defile themselves with mankind”, ASV is “abusers of themselves with mankind, New King James and Worrell say “sodomites”, NIV has “perverts” while the NAS and New Living write “homosexuals”. So who is right?
One thing is clear. That being that this interpretation debate is a relatively new one. For years these passages were always translated as ‘abuser of self” or “sodomite” (e.g. KVJ and Worrell). Because of the ambiguity of the literal meaning behind arsenokoitais the earlier Bible scholars felt an equally ambiguous ‘catch all’ word such as “sodomite” seemed appropriate enough. They and others since then have pointed out that if Paul wanted to specifically say “a homosexual man” there were certainly words in the Greek language to do so as homosexuality was a rather common practice in both the Greek and Roman cultures (Paul wrote his letters in the Greek language). Paul elected NOT to use these words and instead used the more ambiguous word arsenokoitais. So what DOES arsenokoitais mean?
Strongs (#733) doesn’t offer much help saying that the word means “sodomite” and “abuser of (that defileself) with mankind.” The same translations used by earlier versions of the Bible such as Worrell and King James (Note: these translations came out long before the current homosexual debate was raging and thus the Bible translators felt no compunction to have to ‘side’ with one group or another…).
Yeah inspired right?
Nachimir said:
If you've never read "The World as Will and Idea" by Arthur Schopenhauer, do so now. What you just said is pretty much a paraphrase of his philosophy. His philosophy being, in turn, a simplistic paraphrase of eastern religous philosophy, especially Buddhism.
Thank you, Schopenhauer and Kant are definitely on the list for when I finally move on to aesthetics
Nachimir said:
I too had a particularly moving dream followed by a vision in contemplation. I would say it was trance-like, I wasn't controlling it at all but fully awake. The experience and realization was short and sweet, but the effects continue to echo for me. The month or two preceding that night were probably the toughest of my life, and I found the peace to be a product of surrender. I let go of what had been killing me, gave it up, and something terribly deep inside shined through and made for the experience. I think the terminology or the theistic aspect really are unimportant as long as you recognize your own journey towards "self-transcendence".
Your last bit as well, reminds me of Hermann Hesse's Steppenwolf. I identified highly with that book.
Chrysaor said:
Yeah, that sounds very similar to my own experience. Thanks for the book title, I'll look it up
Last edited:
I believe positive thinking has a lot to do with the way we feel and in many ways our destiny.Nachimir said:
there are many big churches in my area and i know where each pastor/head guy lives..
each one lives in the high-income part of town ($300,000+) homes always drive new cars (most valued >$40,000) even seen one pastor with a phantom ($350,000 car)
the biggest church in the town my grandparents attend daily. average attendance for a sunday is around 7,000. but what i find hilarious is that when you walk in there are volunteers (so they dont get paid) that stand at every door (5 sets of double doors to the main room one on each side of the door) holding out collection plates. then there is 45 min of singing. after the singing is over 10 min of more collection plate passing around. then about an hour of worship. collection plate goes around even more. then you hear a sad story about some local family. collection plate makes another round. then the pastor says his final words and the collection plate makes one last trip....
and the funny thing is.... there is more money in it each time.
ive gone to a few plays and at the damned play they passed the collection plate 2 times. one at intermission and once when you left.
its been said that the bible tells us to give 10% of our earnings to the church... i wana know exactly where is says this.
10% not a whole goddamned paycheck.
thanksgiving my grandparents have a huge feast. been like that for 20 years now. they invited the head singer guy/preacher (basicly second in command) and his family. and the whole time they were there, they did nothing but comment on the food about if it was good, bad, undercooked, overcooked, etc. and they had this air about them as if they were too good for us middle/lower class people.
each one lives in the high-income part of town ($300,000+) homes always drive new cars (most valued >$40,000) even seen one pastor with a phantom ($350,000 car)
the biggest church in the town my grandparents attend daily. average attendance for a sunday is around 7,000. but what i find hilarious is that when you walk in there are volunteers (so they dont get paid) that stand at every door (5 sets of double doors to the main room one on each side of the door) holding out collection plates. then there is 45 min of singing. after the singing is over 10 min of more collection plate passing around. then about an hour of worship. collection plate goes around even more. then you hear a sad story about some local family. collection plate makes another round. then the pastor says his final words and the collection plate makes one last trip....
and the funny thing is.... there is more money in it each time.
ive gone to a few plays and at the damned play they passed the collection plate 2 times. one at intermission and once when you left.
its been said that the bible tells us to give 10% of our earnings to the church... i wana know exactly where is says this.
10% not a whole goddamned paycheck.
thanksgiving my grandparents have a huge feast. been like that for 20 years now. they invited the head singer guy/preacher (basicly second in command) and his family. and the whole time they were there, they did nothing but comment on the food about if it was good, bad, undercooked, overcooked, etc. and they had this air about them as if they were too good for us middle/lower class people.