The difference is this, I try to live this life without regret, because all the evidence points to it being the only one I am ever going to get.

If you live life without regret then why do you think you have only one life. Remember when you die everyone awaits resurrection.

The most complete and accurate hypothesis of consciousness I have seen is that consciousness is an emergent phenomena of the connections between the neurons of the brain. This means that when the brain dies, the consciousness ceases to exist. No reincarnation, no afterlife. If you have a model that disagrees and makes testable predictions, spit it out already.

What you've said is exactly true. Everyone that dies stays dead. They don't magically go to some eternal happiness or eternal torture. That is a misconception by humans. The bible states your breath or soul life goes back to God, and in such becomes a part of him (I think, correct me if I'm wrong).
This is the life in which you're judged (if you're not born again of the Holy Spirit that is). All of your acts and deeds will be put forth in front of God, and he will judge not just you, but everyone else as well.

Whatever that means. I have been told by countless baptists, catholics, and Christians of unknown denomination that I am going to hell (according to Dante's inferno, you can visit me in the city of dis, and/or limbo), but the threats and rewards never struck me as credible, not even as a method to control believers (If the purpose of these carrots and sticks is to prevent bad behavior, it fails spectacularly). Also, what will I be judged against and why? Of what utility could I be I to a being with enough power and knowledge to create us in this world of superficial perception? What vain god would care to be a judge of ants(humans)? The idea that a deity would be interested in human life is just silly.

Well, using fear to motivate people to do the right thing is not the right thing to do:
"For God hath not given us the spirit of fear" II Timothy 1:7
"fear not, neither be dismayed" Deuteronomy 31:8
Other verses: Proverbs 29:25, Psalms 34:4.

There is so many improper teachings by people that I just don't know where to start... There is a lot to know. As a matter of fact, science does not disprove God, it merely proves him. The only reason the controversy is so large is because people look at religion as a scientific theory, not as a religion.
Religion != Science. Science is the workings of the universe in the senses realm. Religion is the working of the universe in the spiritual realm. They do not have anything to do with each other. And with proper teaching of religion and proper teaching of science, they both match up perfectly. It would take many years of studying to look at theories of the universe and match them up with the religious views on them. Too bad we don't have an original copy of the bible, that would be nice, no mistranslations.

It may not be part of your belief, but it is in the bible:

Proverbs 3:7 Be not wise in your own eyes;
fear the LORD, and turn away from evil.

Psalm 25:14 The friendship of the LORD is for those who fear him,
and he makes known to them his covenant.

When I talk to people about religion, it seems as though their impression of god is unique, as though they see only the parts of it that confirm their belief. When you read the bible, do you not weigh those statements that agree with your current worldview more heavily? Here is an example of what I mean: When you look at the sky and see clouds, it is normally rather mundane. When someone suggests that there is an animal in the clouds, you might find the shapes of several different kinds of animals in the clouds. The same thing happens when people read the bible, they find whatever they expect to find. This is why people, even from the same book, can come up with gods that are as different as the belief holders' personalities.

Ahhh, a misinterpretation. That word fear doesn't mean "to be afraid", rather it means to respect. Just as a servant fears his master. He respects his master. It was a figure of speech used back in the biblical times.

A good analogy. But how can one look at the clouds and state, "There are no clouds."

You mean, "There are no rabbits in the clouds."

"For dust you are and to dust you will return." Genesis 3:19 Meaning there is no transfer of the actual human body to another realm. And proof of this shows dead things rot that return to the ground.

"the spirit itself returns to the true God who gave it." Ecclesiastes 12:7
Does this mean that a spirit entity literally travels through space into God's presence? Not at all! The way in which the Bible uses the word "returns" does not require an actual movement from one place to another. For instance, unfaithful Israelites were told
"'Return to me, and I will return to you,' Jehovah of armies has said."
And for hell and hellfire
Since the dead have no conscious existence, hell cannot be a fiery place of torment where the wicked suffer after death. In fact Jesus never mention him being torchered or tormented when he was "dead". Acts 2:31

So yup, as Akar said some people have misconceptions of what the words in the bible mean like when the word fear is used.

That's wonderful, but I'm missing the part where it says the bible isn't just a work of fiction. So fill me in on that.

The bible is the word of God, canceling out all fiction calling.

Merely? You mean actually. Improper big word talk make smart go down.

The only reason the controversy is so large is because people look at religion as a scientific theory, not as a religion.
ok I'm actually following you.

ok, so how do 2 things, that don't have ANYTHING to do with each other, match up perfectly?

Thanks for clearing that up. I am convinced now.

Now we can continue discussing the interpretation of the bible. So should we take everything literally? If not, then to what degree, and according to what authority?

At the most, the bible is a witness to god-involved events. Most christians won't argue against that.

I say the bible is a work of the flying spaghetti monster, canceling out any divine calling, and making it a bunch of ficticious junk. Show me how your intrepretation is any more credible than mine, please.

Funny, you don't have any supporting evidence, and here I shall disprove evolution:

Well, as it says here, plants existed at least 2 billion years before anything else came into evolution. But here is whats so silly, you see, plants need carbon dioxide correct? And well, they use it all up and release lots of oxygen into the air. Now the reverse of this process, cellular respiration, takes that oxygen (and some other things), and releases a byproduct of carbon dioxide. Ahh, but here is our flaw. There was nothing that could possibly convert the oxygen back into carbon dioxide. So all of the carbon dioxide on the Earth would slowly be drained. And over 2 billion years?! Oh please, thats a hell of a long time to drain all of the carbon dioxide on the Earth.
You might say, oh well, "the plants adapted to the lack of carbon dioxide".
How would that work? By the time the carbon dioxide levels are low enough for the plants of notice, I doubt they'll have a few million years left to adapt to it.

Another example how God exists, just look around you, in the dark that is. You ever wonder how you see in the dark? You have 2 lenses, a color lens that works just like a camera lens... and then you have a night vision lens... that circles around your color lens. And you can still detect 3D objects in night vision. So explain to me this, How in the hell can you even see at night when your night-vision lens has a big hole in it?

And another thing, since us humans are so great and powerful because we can figure out where we came from all by ourselves, why can't we fix our own damn problems we cause? Oh wait, thats because everything we touch gets screwed up. Where animals live in perfect balance with each other, we charge in and disrupt the balance. So how do you know these HUMAN theories aren't as screwed up as everything else we've applied. Now I know God's word isn't screwed up, because it wasn't written by HUMANS it was written by God. And still humans have managed to screw even that up as well!

plants aerobically respirate at night, producing CO2 and water from oxygen and stored hydrocarbons, it is how they make use of the energy stored by photosynthesis.
This is wrong, We have cones(which are sensitive to only specific colors of light) and rods(which detect light of any color) in both eyes, and the same lens focuses light on both the cones and the rods which are interspersed in the retina. There is a hole in our vision at the point the optic nerve enters the eye (all vision, not just night), but this hole is in the periphery, and the brain just kinda fills it in with whatever surrounds it. Also, It would not matter if there was a hole in the lens, next time you have access to a telescope or something, cover half of the front lens, the result is not half a picture, but a full picture at half the brightness, because you do not change the focal point, only the amount of light gathered. Also, it is not the focus of the lens that gives us depth perception, we get our depth perception from the parallax perspective of our eyes (stereoscopic vision).

The bottom line: Don't try to bullshit people who know what they are talking about, you will only end up getting embarrassed.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Nov 24 2007, 5:21 pm by AntiSleep.

Some bacteria respirate aerobically too.

Since Anti already attacked the science point, I'll just continue on this route, at least one more time.


You totally failed. Let me put it another way, and you tell me how this makes any less sense then what you are saying:

So how do we know these GOD theoreies aren't as screwed up as everything else we've applied. Now I know The Flying Spaghettie Monster's word isn't screwed up, because it wasn't written by GOD it was written by The Flying Spaghetti Monster. And still God has managed to screw even that up as well!