"You never accepted Jesus." - 'Ugly Betty' actor kills mother with samurai sword

Status
Not open for further replies.
Shift said:
Answer my previous question. There have been people of amazing intelligence who have believed in God, some to militant levels, not just in the past, but in present day. That therefore destroys your argument I'm afraid.
Click to expand...
Yes, there have been intellegent people who do believe in god. I've never said this wasnt possible.
I'm not going to list all the athiest or non-believing intellegent people that once walked the earth as it doesn't prove anything. The fact that you list 7 people who did/do believe in god, doesn't "destroy" my argument. (being that its more likely that people with an higher IQ are less likely to believe in a god)

Did you read that article?
 
Yes I got the jist (and it was wrong about religion declining, especially in Christianity terms, it has more followers now than ever) but you specifically insinuated that people who followed God were of lesser intelligence, that was the argument I was addressing.
 
how about [more] prone to flights of fancy than non religious people?
 
Shift said:
Yes I got the jist (and it was wrong about religion declining, especially in Christianity terms, it has more followers now than ever)
Click to expand...

Well durr the human population is bigger now than ever. So how about per capita?
 
Shift said:
Yes I got the jist (and it was wrong about religion declining, especially in Christianity terms, it has more followers now than ever) but you specifically insinuated that people who followed God were of lesser intelligence, that was the argument I was addressing.
Click to expand...

All i ever said was that people in general are quite stupid and unedjucated, and alot of them also believe in god. I never literally said that "people who followed God were of lesser intelligence"... Are you religious?
 
Dodo said:
All i ever said was that people in general are quite stupid and unedjucated, and alot of them also believe in god. I never literally said that "people who followed God were of lesser intelligence"... Are you religious?
Click to expand...

ok we can end this line of debate:


In 2008, intelligence researcher Helmuth Nyborg examined whether IQ relates to denomination and income, using representative data from the National Longitudinal Study of Youth, which includes intelligence tests on a representative selection of white American youth, where they have also replied to questions about religious belief. His results, published in the scientific journal Intelligence demonstrated that on average, Atheists scored 1.95 IQ points higher than Agnostics, 3.82 points higher than Liberal persuasions, and 5.89 IQ points higher than Dogmatic persuasions. [4] "I'm not saying that believing in God makes you dumber. My hypothesis is that people with a low intelligence are more easily drawn toward religions, which give answers that are certain, while people with a high intelligence are more skeptical," says the professor
Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religiosity_and_intelligence#Studies_comparing_religious_belief_and_I.Q.
 
Hokey said:
And this is why Christianity should be abolished before the next generation learns of it.
Click to expand...

This is also why samurai swords, television, the concept of family, apartments, building, masonry in general and/or acting in public should be abolished before the next generation learns of it.
 
Shift said:
Answer my previous question. There have been people of amazing intelligence who have believed in God, some to militant levels, not just in the past, but in present day. That therefore destroys your argument I'm afraid.
Click to expand...

Its been pretty well documented that on average people who don't believe in god have a higher intelligence than those who do. As with anything, exceptions exist, but that does not change the broader conclusions.
 
Dodo said:
Thanks Stern!
"My hypothesis is that people with a low intelligence are more easily drawn toward religions, which give answers that are certain, while people with a high intelligence are more skeptical," Couldn't have said it better.
[/debate]
Click to expand...

I will agree with that to an extent, but there are a lot of genuine Christians, including myself, who are very thoughtful (to replace skeptical) about their own faith, or look at everything in a logical fashion as well as basing elements on faith.

And for the record I'm a Christian, although I thought that was well documented in these parts now :p
 
I think a lot of people just see God as a 'comfort' figure. Obviously not in this mans case.
 
Shift said:
I will agree with that to an extent, but there are a lot of genuine Christians, including myself, who are very thoughtful (to replace skeptical) about their own faith, or look at everything in a logical fashion as well as basing elements on faith.

And for the record I'm a Christian, although I thought that was well documented in these parts now :p
Click to expand...

to be a "thoughtful" christian you'd have to completely throw out whole segments of religious belief (ie: genesis) ..at that point it becomes cherry picking parts you agree with and discarding others. in that sense there's a certain dishonesty with your faith as it is abridged or tailored to suit your needs. where does selective editing begin and end? at what point does the belief system become so watered down that it no longer resembles belief but rather self gratification for the purpose of maintaining some sort of religious connection due to tradition?
 
CptStern said:
to be a "thoughtful" christian you'd have to completely throw out whole segments of religious belief (ie: genesis) ..at that point it becomes cherry picking parts you agree with and discarding others. in that sense there's a certain dishonesty with your faith as it is abridged or tailored to suit your needs. where does selective editing begin and end? at what point does the belief system become so watered down that it no longer resembles belief but rather self gratification for the purpose of maintaining some sort of religious connection due to tradition?
Click to expand...

I have no idea where you getting this from but I'm not cherry picking anything, I follow and believe the entire Bible, but I can still look at in a logical and thoughtful fashion. I do think the New Testament has a lot more relevance than the Old Testament definitely because otherwise I'd be a Jew, not a Christian.
 
Shift said:
I have no idea where you getting this from but I'm not cherry picking anything, I follow and believe the entire Bible, but I can still look at in a logical and thoughtful fashion. I do think the New Testament has a lot more relevance than the Old Testament definitely because otherwise I'd be a Jew, not a Christian.
Click to expand...

so you're a creationist
 
at least he used a samurai sword

would have been cooler if he said "you never a accepted the Shogun!!!", though
 
Shift said:
I have no idea where you getting this from but I'm not cherry picking anything, I follow and believe the entire Bible
Click to expand...

So you never eat shellfish? Because that's an abomination. Just like homosexuality.

If you eat clam chowder you're a cherry-picker or doomed to hell.
 
CptStern said:
so you're a creationist
Click to expand...

I'm a Christian, I believe God is the creator.

Eejit said:
So you never eat shellfish? Because that's an abomination. Just like homosexuality.

If you eat clam chowder you're a cherry-picker or doomed to hell.
Click to expand...

Hardly... for one, sin doesn't condemn you to hell, if you think so then you have seriously missed the whole point of Christianity.
Secondly, those 'abominations' are both taken from one chapter in Leviticus, from the OLD testament, which is what the Jews follow by the letter. The only relevant purpose of the Old testament to Christians is to point towards Jesus' life in the new testament, so many prophecies point towards the cross. The word testament literally means agreement, the old one was overwritten when the new one came into place, hence the two sections of the bible. Jesus' very existence changed so much. The only regulations that are mentioned in the old testament that should still be adhered to are the ones that are also mentioned in the new testament.
 
Shift said:
Yes, your point being?
Click to expand...

S6Fys.png
 
Shift said:
Yes, your point being?
Click to expand...

it seems contradictory to this statement:

Shift said:
but I can still look at in a logical and thoughtful fashion.
Click to expand...

there is nothing logical in creationsim; it's all belief


Shift said:
Eating shellfish!? Seriously? Are you trying to imply that because someone commits a 'sin' (and if that what this list here is supposed to consist of then i think yo're a bit.. off) they're doomed to hell? Then you're really not getting the whole point of Christianity...

Try reading the New Testament (or at the very least, the gospels) and then get back to me.
Click to expand...

his point is that you're cherry picking because it is a sin according to the bible which again points to the notion that you've based your belief on "logic"
 
Shift said:
Eating shellfish!? Seriously? Are you trying to imply that because someone commits a 'sin' (and if that what this list here is supposed to consist of then i think yo're a bit.. off) they're doomed to hell? Then you're really not getting the whole point of Christianity...
Click to expand...

It's the same type of sin "abomination" as homosexuality, which many many christians believe results in hell.

Shift said:
Try reading the New Testament (or at the very least, the gospels) and then get back to me.
Click to expand...

Shift said:
I follow and believe the entire Bible
Click to expand...
 
Okay for some reason the original post I never actually submitted, somehow did get submitted, I re-edited the whole thing if you will check :p

And I disagree that no logic can be apparent because I believe God created the Universe and the Earth, to me I think thats more logical than any other argument, much better than 'one day a universe decided to appear! BANG!' out of nothingness, but thats a tangent...

And for the record, the Bible doesn't condemn homosexuals as far as I know, its condemns them sleeping together, it says its an 'abomination' for a man to lie with another man as if he were a women, if you are referring to the verse in Leviticus anyway. But as I said in my post above (the edited one >.>), none of that is really relevant to Christians anyway because it isn't even mentioned in the New Testament.
 
Shift said:
I follow and believe the entire Bible
Click to expand...

Except when it's an inconvenient part of the Old Testament.
 
Shift said:
Okay for some reason the original post I never actually submitted, somehow did get submitted, I re-edited the whole thing if you will check :p

And I disagree that no logic can be apparent because I believe God created the Universe and the Earth, to me I think thats more logical than any other argument, much better than 'one day a universe decided to appear! BANG!' out of nothingness, but thats a tangent...
Click to expand...
Sure you can apply logic, but your logic is flawed.

You can't claim the universe is too improbable a phenomenon to have come into existence by chance alone, then propose that the cause was the will of a god who by definition is infinitely more complex and infinitely more improbable. You can't have it both ways.

Shift said:
And for the record, the Bible doesn't condemn homosexuals as far as I know, its condemns them sleeping together, it says its an 'abomination' for a man to lie with another man as if he were a women, if you are referring to the verse in Leviticus anyway. But as I said in my post above (the edited one >.>), none of that is really relevant to Christians anyway because it isn't even mentioned in the New Testament.
Click to expand...
There are many verses saying that old testament law still applies, more than verses saying it doesn't apply. You are cherry picking.
 
Shift said:
And I disagree that no logic can be apparent because I believe God created the Universe and the Earth, to me I think thats more logical than any other argument, much better than 'one day a universe decided to appear! BANG!' out of nothingness, but thats a tangent...
Click to expand...

I loathe to be the one to bring up an age old rebuttal, but sometimes they're the most significant and it's obviously not sinking in: so, God - BANG! out of 'nothingness' too, right? I don't sympathise with the need for a convenient fiction over the more evident and modest view that we simply cannot conceive of the before.
 
Shift said:
And I disagree that no logic can be apparent because I believe God created the Universe and the Earth, to me I think thats more logical than any other argument, much better than 'one day a universe decided to appear! BANG!' out of nothingness, but thats a tangent...
Click to expand...

You are subscribing to the simpletons view of time, but as a firm Christian we can expect nothing more.

Time doesn't progress in the simple *tick tick* you perceive it to. If no matter is moving and no energy is being transferred, time doesn't progress. That being so, if before the Big Bang all matter was still in the smallest possible space, there would be no "time". Rendering your "Time must start and end" a moot point.

I don't have very high hopes of your ability to understand this, but perhaps, if you spend time (read years) thinking about it, one day, it may all make sense to you, and you will be freed of your ethereal shackles of thought oppression.
 
Shift said:
The word testament literally means agreement, the old one was overwritten when the new one came into place, hence the two sections of the bible. Jesus' very existence changed so much. The only regulations that are mentioned in the old testament that should still be adhered to are the ones that are also mentioned in the new testament.
Click to expand...

Does it not bother you that your salvation is so tied up in wishy washy legislation that not even God can stick to? For millennium, his chosen people were required to abide by needlessly strict and seemingly arbitrary laws in order to enter his kingdom (and still do!), and then one day he's just like, "Hey guys I finished the revised edition! It's much easier now and you can pretty much throw out all that other crap. Haha, shellfish, what was I thinking?! Anyway I'll send down my secretary to tell you all about it k."

Well gee, how nice of you, God. Quick question: Are these rules retroactive, or do all the people who tried and failed to live by your horrible, horrible laws - laws so bad you yourself (apparently) redacted them - get to roast in hell some more? Cause, I mean, kudos on fessing up and everything, but let's face it, 2000 years isn't a whole lot of time in the larger scheme of things when the stakes are eternal ****ing damnation. Even if you're a creationist, that's still 2/3rds of forever that people have had to mess up in the worst way possible, and most likely did!

But yeah, keep saying you follow the "merciful god" of the New Testament. Jesus is such a saint. He, who was born of God, and died a total of once to make up for all the people who had died and suffered in the afterlife beforehand. What a guy!
 
Yeah, I'm always confused about how Christians like to point out that Jesus died for our sins, as if that would make me feel guilty or something. Dude, he's God. Of all possible things in the universe you should feel sorry for, Jesus absolutely comes in last place.
 
PvtRyan said:
Yeah, I'm always confused about how Christians like to point out that Jesus died for our sins, as if that would make me feel guilty or something. Dude, he's God. Of all possible things in the universe you should feel sorry for, Jesus absolutely comes in last place.
Click to expand...

I think the "He died for your sins" thing is more the reopening of man's direct connection with God more than a guilt trip (Then again, with how fundamental churches are...) The link was supposedly lost during the Fall of Man and Christ, as a physical manifestation of God, existed for the sake of re-establishing that link.

According to my Christian friend, Christ would have looked at those crucifying him like you would look at a troubled child trying to beat the shit out of you. He's no actual threat to you as a being, so you only look upon him with pity and the love of wanting to help him. Afterall, God would forgive even Lucifer if he said "Have Mercy, Lord."

...Or something.
 
The idea that the idea that devil exists is the work of the devil is the work of the devil.
 
Okay, it seems I'm a little late on the uptake here but just to reply to this;
PvtRyan said:
Yeah, I'm always confused about how Christians like to point out that Jesus died for our sins, as if that would make me feel guilty or something. Dude, he's God. Of all possible things in the universe you should feel sorry for, Jesus absolutely comes in last place.
Click to expand...

You think the greatest sacrifice in history is a guilt trip?... Jesus took all the sin of the people he would save on himself in his death, abolishing the supposed belief that doing something wrong sends you to hell. No-one is perfect and that's why Jesus had to stand in our place. Keeping the rules and regulations does nothing to get a person into heaven, Jesus is the only gateway, the former is "salvation by works" which is continually spoken against in the gospels. I'm not saying you can be an evil person and go to heaven but what I am saying is that you don't have to be perfect.
 
Thing is, Darkshines, if you step back and read that from the perspective of a non believer it reads like a cutscene from Metal Gear Solid.

I'd like to say you can't make this shit up, but it obviously can be. Then edited it by committee, and translated a few times, and reinterpreted over and over ...


//edit
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top