• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Christians: Why aren't you Muslim?

jet57 said:
Yeah - hate.
Click to expand...

I mean, you're not 100% wrong. I was mostly going for the fact that these people have grown up in a very specific cultural bubble, where very specific ideas are heavily reinforced by all of the people around them. That's true of every religion, and even most political ideologies.
 
Jesse Booth said:
I mean, you're not 100% wrong. I was mostly going for the fact that these people have grown up in a very specific cultural bubble, where very specific ideas are heavily reinforced by all of the people around them. That's true of every religion, and even most political ideologies.
Click to expand...

It's tyranny and tyranny says hate those who are not like you. Europe had religious wars for hundreds of years and the far right wants to go back to them so that they can force their ideology on everybody else: thus we had the pilgrims... The radical branch of Islam is the very same way. We should by them an island and give them sticks and stone and let'em wail on each other.

These people are fundamentalists who are led by the nose by people want nothing but power; that's all it is, that's all it's ever been. The only way for the rest of us to live in peace is to marginalize all of them.
 
Hondo said:
Burning in hell is a misunderstanding. You cannot remove Christianity from its Jewish roots. Jesus was a devout 1st century Palestinian Jew who believed in the Tanakh. "The dead know nothing," is from the Tanakh. Christianity isn't about hell. It's about a life beyond Sheol. Even the Greeks at the time believed that the soul could transcend the body. "Destruction" and "eternal punishment" is nothingness not non-believers being tortured forever. That's a punishment reserved for the devil and demons. We may not understand the essence of evil in the world. If a person at the time had a vision of locusts spitting fire, I doubt they'd be locusts. More likely a future vision like that would be attack helicopters firing missiles or drones or some future weapon. What John saw about hell in the book of Revelation could have a plausible real world meaning. Some think Revelation was a coded condemnation of the Roman Empire. Others think he saw something modern. Jesus was talking about a dump outside Jerusalem that used fire to destroy refuse when talking about Gehenna. Translations, tradition and mythology has led to the idea that hell is eternal torture whereas may be just a death of no return. Sheol, Gehenna, Hades, and Hell were all translated to mean the same. But, ancient language experts believe that might not be correct.

Religious belief may also be a genetic thing. They isolated the God gene a few years ago IIRC. Which also might be a way to look at the "chosen" in any religion.
Click to expand...

So when/ how did the idea of hell as we understand it today (Fire, guys with pitchforks etc.) come about?
 
jet57 said:
It's tyranny and tyranny says hate those who are not like you. Europe had religious wars for hundreds of years and the far right wants to go back to them so that they can force their ideology on everybody else: thus we had the pilgrims... The radical branch of Islam is the very same way. We should by them an island and give them sticks and stone and let'em wail on each other.

These people are fundamentalists who are led by the nose by people want nothing but power; that's all it is, that's all it's ever been. The only way for the rest of us to live in peace is to marginalize all of them.
Click to expand...

Again, you're not wrong, but that just wasn't what I was describing in my post. I was referring very specifically to a kind of faith-based confirmation bias.
 
jet57 said:
Zukoff's book was written many years ago and covers things like the double slit experiment and quantum mechanics. If you don;t want to educate yourself, then don'y. What you're doing here is being a contrarian and showing that you have no idea what you're talking about. You may want to read Stephen Hawking as well.
Click to expand...

His book has zero to do with the actual real science of quantum mechanics. Stephen Hawking would agree with that as he never wrote any books of New Age nonsense.
 
tosca1 said:
You have very, very serious comprehension issues, too? :lol:

Can't FOCUS?

Can't follow logic?



Try again!



Science does not rule out the possibility of God.

However, you insist that there is no God.

In other words............ you're bucking science - not religion.


Therefore, the onus is on you to prove your claim.
Click to expand...

Science says absolutely nothing about the possibility of god. Science does not address make believe concepts. It only allows for those things that can be observed, measured, and tested.
 
jet57 said:
It means you can't destroy it: it's constant.
Click to expand...

In an isolated system. Energy is also transformed or transferred from one form to another.

For example, electrical energy is generated by other forms of energy.
 
devildavid said:
His book has zero to do with the actual real science of quantum mechanics. Stephen Hawking would agree with that as he never wrote any books of New Age nonsense.
Click to expand...

You’ve never read the book, you don’t know what you’re talking about.

Metaphysics is the study of all of it. I don’t subscribe to the “woo-woo” stuff.
 
devildavid said:
In an isolated system. Energy is also transformed or transferred from one form to another.

For example, electrical energy is generated by other forms of energy.
Click to expand...

“Generate”... It takes energy to make energy... See the trap you’ve set for yourself?
 
jet57 said:
You’ve never read the book, you don’t know what you’re talking about.

Metaphysics is the study of all of it. I don’t subscribe to the “woo-woo” stuff.
Click to expand...

There might be a different viewpoint and opinion there.
 
jet57 said:
You’ve never read the book, you don’t know what you’re talking about.

Metaphysics is the study of all of it. I don’t subscribe to the “woo-woo” stuff.
Click to expand...

Metaphysics is not a physical science. Physics is. Quantum mechanics is purely physical science. It is not philosophy. That is the realm of metaphysics.
 
jet57 said:
“Generate”... It takes energy to make energy... See the trap you’ve set for yourself?
Click to expand...

No, I don't. Because you fail to acknowledge two thing. Energy is constant in an isolated system. And energy comes in different forms. There is not just one type of energy. Mechanical energy can produce electrical energy. We call them both energy, but they are not the same.
 
Last edited:
devildavid said:
No, I don't. Because you fail to acknowledge two thing. Energy is constant in an isolated system. And energy comes in different forms. There is not just one type of energy. Mechanical energy can produce electrical energy. We call them both energy, but they are not the same.
Click to expand...

Energy is a universal constant dude.
 
devildavid said:
That does not say that energy is a universal constant.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure it did by the 2nd paragraph:

"The universe itself is a closed system, so the total amount of energy in existence has always been the same. The forms that energy takes, however, are constantly changing."


OM
 
Omega Man said:
Pretty sure it did by the 2nd paragraph:

"The universe itself is a closed system, so the total amount of energy in existence has always been the same. The forms that energy takes, however, are constantly changing."


OM
Click to expand...

We are assuming the universe is a closed system. That is because we have no evidence that there is a 'multiverse', which is a hypothesis that is suggested by some of the mathematics. If there is indeed a multiverse, then it is feasible for it to be an open system. If we can provide sufficient evidence there is a so called 'multiverse', then the concept of the universe being closed will have to be reexamined.
 
RAMOSS said:
We are assuming the universe is a closed system. That is because we have no evidence that there is a 'multiverse', which is a hypothesis that is suggested by some of the mathematics. If there is indeed a multiverse, then it is feasible for it to be an open system. If we can provide sufficient evidence there is a so called 'multiverse', then the concept of the universe being closed will have to be reexamined.
Click to expand...

And yet wouldn't a "multiverse" be considered part of everything "universal"? And in the face of such uncertainty, that comment in Scientific American describes a universal constant.


OM
 
Omega Man said:
And yet wouldn't a "multiverse" be considered part of everything "universal"? And in the face of such uncertainty, that comment in Scientific American describes a universal constant.


OM
Click to expand...

Not according to the theorists. But, when you get into that level of math, my head aches. All I know is that there is a heck of a lot we don't know. I do know that it is entirely possible that even if there is other 'universes', they could exist in isolation to each other.
 
Omega Man said:
Pretty sure it did by the 2nd paragraph:

"The universe itself is a closed system, so the total amount of energy in existence has always been the same. The forms that energy takes, however, are constantly changing."


OM
Click to expand...

It does not say energy is a universal constant. Those were the precise words used. Putting it that way implies a different meaning. Adding to that that this poster thinks energy is just one thing, and is a subject of metaphysics. So I took it in that context.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom