• 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!

What is your religion?

What is your religion?

  • Total voters
    132
Major differences though, The Gambino’s fought back and were intent on killing their enemies and gain personal wealth.
Click to expand...

no actually blood shed is bad for business.

The early church leaders gave up their wealth, witnessed peace and forgiveness to their enemies and did not resist persecution but accepted their fates at the hands of their enemies.
Click to expand...

Wow what a romantic notion, to bad it isnt based on facts.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
:lol: where did the universe come from athiest?
Click to expand...

Look up the Big Bang.


Please link scientifically as to where it came from and what was there before it....
Click to expand...

They have these places called libraries, perhaps you've heard of them? Maybe you ought to actually get an education before you make yourself look like a fool.

game set match.
Click to expand...

Hardly. This comes from a religious background where they simply make crap up (a god), demand that it's always existed, provide no reasonable explanation for how that could be, assert that this god, for which there is no evidence whatsoever, created everything without providing a mechanism for such to have happened, then sits down acting smug because you've got a tremendous fantasy and you think you're doing better than everyone else.

Come on back when you can actually support any of that with objective evidence, okay? Until then, I'll go where the evidence actually leads and that's a purely naturalistic explanation. :roll:
 
Coronado said:
Yeah, who could construe that as being anti-religion? :roll:
Click to expand...

I freely admit that I'm anti-religion in the same sense that I'm anti-slavery, anti-racism and anti-stupidity. If you're expecting that's a revelation, I don't know what to tell you.
 
Cephus said:
I freely admit that I'm anti-religion in the same sense that I'm anti-slavery, anti-racism and anti-stupidity. If you're expecting that's a revelation, I don't know what to tell you.
Click to expand...

But you sig says, and I quote, "I'm not anti-religion."
 
Lachean said:
But you sig says, and I quote, "I'm not anti-religion."
Click to expand...

And religion is hypocritical which is why I oppose it. It's not that religion exists that I dislike, it's that religion, the overwhelming majority of them anyhow, create their own double and triple-standards for evaluating reality, invent their own definitions, and make absurd exceptions for their magic man in the sky. There aren't many religions that don't do that and for the very few that do, I've got no problem with them whatsoever, even if I don't agree with their methods or beliefs.

Too bad none of those religions are western religions.
 
OxymoronP said:
no actually blood shed is bad for business.
Click to expand...

Apparently the Gambinos do not agree with your assessment of what constitutes good business practice.
Gambino crime family Summary
The Gambino Crime Family is one of the "Five Families" that controls organized crime activities based in New York City, United States, within the nationwide criminal phenomenon known as the Mafia (or Cosa Nostra). Based in New York City, the group's operations extend to much of the eastern seaboard and all across the nation to California. Its illicit activities include labor racketeering, gambling, loansharking, extortion, murder for hire, solid and toxic waste dumping violations, construction, building and cement violations, fraud and wire fraud, hijacking, pier thefts and fencing.
Click to expand...


OxymoronP said:
Wow what a romantic notion, to bad it isnt based on facts.
Click to expand...

Until Constantine Christianity was a banned persecuted religion. The broad main stream teaching was pacifist and peaceful submission to execution. If you have information to the contrary please post it.

There were also Gnostic sects of course and perhaps there were a few sects that believed in violent resistance. I would not be surprised but I have never looked into it either

Moe
 
Cephus said:
Look up the Big Bang. They have these places called libraries, perhaps you've heard of them? Maybe you ought to actually get an education before you make yourself look like a fool.
Click to expand...

The big bang did the cause of atheism no favors. Atheism is better supported by the steady state model. No beginning no end thus the biblical book of Genesis could not possibly be true and evolution had an infinite amount of time to operate. No creator etc. If the universe truly was static atheism would be triumphant.
Cephus said:
Hardly. This comes from a religious background where they simply make crap up (a god), demand that it's always existed, provide no reasonable explanation for how that could be, assert that this god, for which there is no evidence whatsoever, created everything without providing a mechanism for such to have happened, then sits down acting smug because you've got a tremendous fantasy and you think you're doing better than everyone else.
Click to expand...


Nothing more than your personal opinion which of course you are entitled to. The atheists have made up some of their own crap. Bubble universes, Parallel universes, Baby Universes. Infinite universes where anything can happen but none of these have been discovered or scientifically studied.
Cephus said:
Come on back when you can actually support any of that with objective evidence, okay? Until then, I'll go where the evidence actually leads and that's a purely naturalistic explanation. :roll:
Click to expand...

you to.

Moe
 
Isn't this thread dead yet?

:beatdeadhorse
 
Cephus said:
And religion is hypocritical which is why I oppose it. It's not that religion exists that I dislike, it's that religion, the overwhelming majority of them anyhow, create their own double and triple-standards for evaluating reality, invent their own definitions, and make absurd exceptions for their magic man in the sky. There aren't many religions that don't do that and for the very few that do, I've got no problem with them whatsoever, even if I don't agree with their methods or beliefs.

Too bad none of those religions are western religions.
Click to expand...

Let's assume for a moment that you are right, and that most religions are hypocritical in nature.

Why do you care so much?

What's it to you if people want to believe in a lie to make them happy? How does it harm you in any way? Thomas Jefferson once said, "But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." This applies to believing in one God as well. The only conclusion I can draw from your militant anti-religious stance is that you are insecure in your beliefs. I'm not saying that's true, but it's how you're rubbing off.
 
You're all going to Hell
 
Dav said:
Let's assume for a moment that you are right, and that most religions are hypocritical in nature.

Why do you care so much?
Click to expand...

Because adherents of these hypocritical religions feel compelled to push their ridiculous beliefs on everyone through force of legislation, social pressure, etc. Why do I care indeed.

What's it to you if people want to believe in a lie to make them happy? How does it harm you in any way? Thomas Jefferson once said, "But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." This applies to believing in one God as well. The only conclusion I can draw from your militant anti-religious stance is that you are insecure in your beliefs. I'm not saying that's true, but it's how you're rubbing off.
Click to expand...

So long as they don't push it on anyone else, it's fine to me. Pathetic, certainly, but people can believe anything they want so long as they keep it to themselves. But when they try to shove it into the schools, into the laws, increase the tax burden on everyone else so they can reduce it on themselves, when they insist that their beliefs give them license to harm others, deny them medical treatment, perform "honor killings", see demons at every turn and expect respect for such beliefs, I think it concerns me, as it concerns every rational member of society.

Thomas Jefferson would be leading the charge today against organized religion, modern-day religion both picks his pocket and breaks his leg, it's anti-intellectual and anti-reality. Until that changes, I have no problem standing up in defense of what is factually true and against things that harm society.
 
phattonez said:
Where did the energy and matter for such an event come from?
Click to expand...

We have some good ideas but the truth is, we don't know for sure. There's nothing wrong with not knowing, that doesn't give you license to just make crap up.

By the way, where did God come from? Provide any sort of evidence for it whatsoever.
 
moe said:
The big bang did the cause of atheism no favors. Atheism is better supported by the steady state model. No beginning no end thus the biblical book of Genesis could not possibly be true and evolution had an infinite amount of time to operate. No creator etc. If the universe truly was static atheism would be triumphant.
Click to expand...

1) atheists do not even need to address the question.

2) atheism does not require any particular belief except a disbelief/non-belief in God(s).

moe said:
The atheists have made up some of their own crap.Bubble universes, Parallel universes, Baby Universes. Infinite universes where anything can happen but none of these have been discovered or scientifically studied.
Click to expand...
Scientists only "make up" hypotheses. Scientists do not "make up" evidence. Theories such as the bubble universe, parallel universes are only as strong as the evidence supports them. There are many theories which have great promise, for example String theory, because they are mathematically sound but nonetheless they require empirical evidence before they are accepted in the scientific community.
 
scourge99 said:
1) atheists do not even need to address the question.

2) atheism does not require any particular belief except a disbelief/non-belief in God(s).

Scientists only "make up" hypotheses. Scientists do not "make up" evidence. Theories such as the bubble universe, parallel universes are only as strong as the evidence supports them. There are many theories which have great promise, for example String theory, because they are mathematically sound but nonetheless they require empirical evidence before they are accepted in the scientific community.
Click to expand...


If you wish to debate this then we should take it back to the religious forum rather than hijacking the OP's thread and discussing a religious topic in the wrong forum
 
Oh, but you don't need evidence to prove that there is no God? How convenient.
 
phattonez said:
Oh, but you don't need evidence to prove that there is no God? How convenient.
Click to expand...
:doh

Examine the picture and the explanation in the link. Let me know if you have any questions.

l_29c248a8927b4e8584ae48e831aee9ba.png


RichardDawkins.net Forum • View topic - A-Theist A-Gnostic Definitions
 
Where is the evidence that God does not exist?
 
There are sound logical disproofs of the existence of the Judeo-Christian-Islamic deity, I'd say. For example, we have the paradox of omnipotence:

1. Either God can create a stone that he cannot lift, or he cannot create a stone that he cannot lift.

2. If God can create a stone that he cannot lift, then he is not omnipotent.

3. If God cannot create a stone that he cannot lift, then he is not omnipotent.

4. Therefore, God is not omnipotent.
 
Agnapostate said:
There are sound logical disproofs of the existence of the Judeo-Christian-Islamic deity, I'd say. For example, we have the paradox of omnipotence:

1. Either God can create a stone that he cannot lift, or he cannot create a stone that he cannot lift.

2. If God can create a stone that he cannot lift, then he is not omnipotent.

3. If God cannot create a stone that he cannot lift, then he is not omnipotent.

4. Therefore, God is not omnipotent.
Click to expand...

This question was answered more than 1,500 years ago.

Augustine of Hippo The City of God:
For He is called omnipotent on account of His doing what He wills, not on account of His suffering what He wills not; for if that should befall Him, He would by no means be omnipotent. Wherefore, He cannot do some things for the very reason that He is omnipotent.
Click to expand...

The problem with your rock example is the way you seem to define Omnipotent as it applies to God. God is omnipotent in the sense that there is no being with more power than he has. The bible clarifies the intended meaning of the biblical meaning of Almighty by also teaching that God can not contradict himself. He cannot deny his own existence. He cannot sin He cannot lie etc.

Moe
 
When I see all the beauty of nature, I must believe in a God - of some unknown sort.
But, religion, no; maybe I am a Deist.
"What we have" could not have been designed on some random, hit or miss basis...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom