RELIGION?

Because God is the only possible cause.

How do you know?

Universal, unchanging and immaterial laws can only be accounted for by a universal, unchanging, immaterial being who is eternal.

God is those things.

How do you know any of that can only be accounted for by a universal, unchanging, immaterial being who is eternal?

Creator cannot create beyond it's own capabilities.

Eternal because to create anything in the universe you had to be there beforehand.

Because God is the only possible cause.

How do you know?

Universal, unchanging and immaterial laws can only be accounted for by a universal, unchanging, immaterial being who is eternal.

God is those things.

How do you know any of that can only be accounted for by a universal, unchanging, immaterial being who is eternal?

Creator cannot create beyond it's own capabilities.

Eternal because to create anything in the universe you had to be there beforehand.

Who created the creator?

This is dumb when you realise that the Old Testament is a history book which has never been contradicted and often supported by historical and archaelogical evidence.

Also the Bible clearly states the world was round in isaiah 40:22.

Plus the New testament is one of the most historically accurate books in history.

But you don't want to acknowledge that so you'll maybe up silly arguments to cover it.

I don't give a crap what the Bible states just like I don't give a crap what The Sun states. They're both full of over exaggerated lies and nonsense based on hearsay. Without being there at the exact time its impossible to pin point what is true or not because it is all secondary evidence.

This must be true because its in the Bible and the Bible would never lie to us would it? Cry me a river Legolas.

Ok, since you're all annoying me by your ignorant arguments based on little actual thought but on what some idiot you look up to told you to believe and the fact that I cant sleep I will attempt to settle this right here.
As the son of a theologian and historian and being practically a theologian myself I hope you can respect that what I have to say comes from years of thought.
Firstly hitler:-
To say that Catholics are evil(although I'm proddy) because you associate hitler with them is stupid. If anything else in mein kampf he put forward his belief in eugenics, an outdated and disproven but common at the time notion of social Darwinism, based on this I could also say that anyone who believes what Darwin wrote is evil based on your logic.
I believe the fact was he, like many politicians today emalgamated several religions to win popular support. He was raised catholic but obviously hated his upbringing since he demolished and destroyed every record of his hometown in Austria. The treaties with the Vatican and the catholic party of Germany are also true but this was undoubtably to win popular support at the time because he needed a two thirds majority to create a dictatorship over Germany. You could also argue that he was a pagan since he empathised with Heinrich himler who believed that they should go back to the original aryan religion as a source of their 'superiority'. It's true that his grandfather was probably Jewish but this was just a product of a liaison and he would've had no influence of Judaism. Someone said that mein kampf shouldn't be viewed as a manifesto but it was in prison after the beer hall putch in Munich that he wrote it when he was already joint head of nasdap. I think the book was a clarification of his views for his party which was tiny at the time. His views grew more extreme later. It should also be noted that the book was written by dictation and so it was just a series of hitlers famous rants. It was himler who suggested the 'perfect solution' to hitler and the holocaust that followed. I think that we can conclude from this that hitler was almost completely mad and that it cannot be settled that he held strong beliefs in any religion or non-religion.

Secondly the 'who created the creator'
Classic question and one that tells me instantly that the person I'm talking to is scientifically a muppet.
Science is at a stumbling block when ever it comes to the origin of its theories. Evolution for example, the process of a series of micro evolutions becoming macro evolutions based upon a species new ability to survive better in an enviroment makes sense. However the study of abiogenesis is a complete shambles when you get to the beginning scientists must say that living, breathing life must have evolved from a solid rock, I've looked deeply into this and can't find much solid evidence as this being a process which is possible in any way. It is the same with the big bang. Because of the laws of entropy, it is observed that energy always becomes a colder state just as a fire turns to ash and more stable particles no longer capable of burning, the universes potential exchange of energy decreases and the universe gradually becomes colder until we have just a giant blob of cold matter. However thanks to the laws of thermodynamics 'energy cannot be created nor destroyed' scientist must conclude that the tiny ball of fire that started the big bang must have been there for all of eternity, the laws of entropy say that's rubbish, that's a contradiction if ever I saw one, scientist then say that there must be some other way and so they come up with m-theory which is ridiculously scetchy based upon theories on antimatter and the multiverse theory which many scientists have concluded to be rubbish, therefore any dignified scientist who doesn't believe in god must come to the conclusion that they simply dont have an answer yet, and I don't think they ever will. So when you ask me who created the creator? Don't be so sure of what you already believe, if anything god is the only logical solution since I believe that due to these laws only an infinite being not subjected to these physical laws is capable of creating the world, something has to be infinite somewhere however science simply doesn't have room for it. Here endeth the argument, you either wait for a real answer or you believe

Thirdly the 'the bible doesn't have any historical authority' myth.
If you still believe this then you have not been updated, this is what biblical scholars managed to convince the world in the 60's and 70's. After deeper research I can assure you this is not what the modern biblical scholar believes, I have studied these so called contradictions to death and usually it's because of some muppet who's taking two verses that he doesn't know the context of, compared them, without understanding their meaning and come to the conclusion of something like 'the god of the old testament and the new have two different characters' these are the thoughts of someone who's been taught a very basic theology from some doofus catholic priest and therefore believes he can use it to read through the bible and assess it as complete rubbish by the time he's 16 because he doesn't want the laws of his faith to hold him back from that 'bit on the side' from across the street. I've spent days scouring through the bible, I've read through the old testament and compared where each original city is thought to be from Nineveh to tarshish to Ephesus and I can certainly find no obvious archaeological contradictions. As said before the old testement is pretty sound on its authority. The new testement is a little more difficult. Between certain bits being trimmed to the complete work not being gathered until the treaty of Milan in the fourth century I can see why some people are a little dismayed by its weaker authority however, after reading the works of Josephus and Tacitus I can firstly find no doubt in the existence of Christ and based upon their writings alone I know that he at least claimed to be the son of god, something which throws out the view of Islam and based in concordance with the C.S Lewis conundrum and the following that he got aswell as the disciples utter obedience even unto death I am sure that he was either the greatest magician and con whose ever lived or what he said was true. Even in his death alone, his tomb was garded by a roman garrison which would have been sentenced to death if he had escaped, the Romans had no reason to want to create a legendary leader who could raise from the dead because of the hostilities in Israel as seen by their full scale rebellion forty years after Jesus death which Josephus helped to lead but was crushed by the soon to be emperor of Rome after Nero. The Romans cannot have been in on this plan. Neither were the Jews because of the ruling Pharisees hatred of Jesus, which means a poor carpenter with no formal education from a lakeside village must have created the most audacious and believable miracles ever seen single handed to also be able to fool his disciples and his entire following aswell as going to his own certain death (known because of the report by the leading centurion stating that water poured from his side after crucifixion). Then people say that the gospels can only have been written at least 40 years after Jesus death in the second century although if all of these gospels were gathered by someone like John, the only surviving apostle in Patmos who lived into his nineties and was very old when he had the visions of revelation then the full work could easily have not been published till forty years after Paul's death, iwould say that's pretty close anyway. In conclusion I would ask you to at least give your idea of religion some thought instead of watching some documentary created by religion hating media. Just please make up your own mind and don't go around with some classic question that you believe defeats all religious arguments that you'll just use as a justification not to believe anything instead of looking for any answers like the ones I just gave you.

Very interesting.

I assume you know why the Pope resigned?

Lastly because I'm finally getting tired the 'religion is just a control chip' myth.
If you still think this then it's because you've still got some LSD lodged in your teeth from you days as a free loving hippy.
It's about as factually supported as the planks who believe in aliens and just emphasises the fear the people have of a large institution like the catholic church (of which I'm not a part of being one of the more conservative 'born again' nut jobs). This is just some conspiracy theorist idea from people who believe the catholic church either knows its lieing to the world bit just uses it to get money or that we're a victim of a sham created by a sackcloth wearing genius 2000 years ago. For this I will use my own life as an example to show what little power over people we get from religion. My church is completely independent, we belong to no organisation and of the money we collect some goes to the pastor, then rest either goes to support people in the congregation, to missionaries or to charites of which I know and have visited and am completely confident that the money is used well, we have no financial power. Some of you may think that the power comes from some messiah complex the ministers have but I can assure that there's is the hardest job I have come across, I have dealt with some of the problems they face daily and some of them have sent me into horrifically deep depressions because of some of the horrors that I've seen, my own brother died at a young age doing charity work in Africa, do you think that everything that I go through comes from a feeling of power that I obtain from my work? Absolutely not. I have been in countries and spoken to people who risk their lives daily for what they believe and if you think I do it all just for brownie points to enter heaven then you are mistaken. I do it because my experience has taught me that nothing I seek to achieve apart from my faith has any meaning or purpose in this world and that because I have seen what fulfilling my desires leads me to, I prefer to be led than to find my own way. If anything my life is about servitude, there is no feeling of power to be found in my faith, but I doubt any of you would have the strength to try it.

Very interesting.

I assume you know why the Pope resigned?

Yes, but like I said, I'm not catholic, I'm a reformed baptist and evangelist, Calvinist and empathise with some puritans, as far from catholic as you can get, I don't believe the popes position to be an appointment from god and it sickens me to think that they can possibly believe that his is fulfilling the role of Peter who I think would be discussed at the thought. Rant over, he resigned due to Ill health

Very interesting.

I assume you know why the Pope resigned?

Yes, but like I said, I'm not catholic, I'm a reformed baptist and evangelist, Calvinist and empathise with some puritans, as far from catholic as you can get, I don't believe the popes position to be an appointment from god and it sickens me to think that they can possibly believe that his is fulfilling the role of Peter who I think would be discussed at the thought. Rant over, he resigned due to Ill health

Tell everyone then. I am still under strict orders not to. I really would but fake suicide not for me.

Decent chap, got tipped off at a dinner with order he was the gov of, next pope, etc. I was shown some bits and bobs that would blow your mind. He was going to spill the beans as it were. Sorry to piss on your fire and shit but whichever gods you pay homage to are long gone. They may be back one day but I doubt it. I can't give anymore hints can I.

Very interesting.

I assume you know why the Pope resigned?

Yes, but like I said, I'm not catholic, I'm a reformed baptist and evangelist, Calvinist and empathise with some puritans, as far from catholic as you can get, I don't believe the popes position to be an appointment from god and it sickens me to think that they can possibly believe that his is fulfilling the role of Peter who I think would be discussed at the thought. Rant over, he resigned due to Ill health

Tell everyone then. I am still under strict orders not to. I really would but fake suicide not for me.

Decent chap, got tipped off at a dinner with order he was the gov of, next pope, etc. I was shown some bits and bobs that would blow your mind. He was going to spill the beans as it were. Sorry to piss on your fire and shit but whichever gods you pay homage to are long gone. They may be back one day but I doubt it. I can't give anymore hints can I.

As for the muslims, they are fighting hard mostly male though and regard women as a "throw away" objects. Cardinal Ratzinger btw is as fit as fiddle.

Very interesting.

I assume you know why the Pope resigned?

Yes, but like I said, I'm not catholic, I'm a reformed baptist and evangelist, Calvinist and empathise with some puritans, as far from catholic as you can get, I don't believe the popes position to be an appointment from god and it sickens me to think that they can possibly believe that his is fulfilling the role of Peter who I think would be discussed at the thought. Rant over, he resigned due to Ill health

Tell everyone then. I am still under strict orders not to. I really would but fake suicide not for me.

Decent chap, got tipped off at a dinner with order he was the gov of, next pope, etc. I was shown some bits and bobs that would blow your mind. He was going to spill the beans as it were. Sorry to piss on your fire and shit but whichever gods you pay homage to are long gone. They may be back one day but I doubt it. I can't give anymore hints can I.

As for the muslims, they are fighting hard mostly male though and regard women as a "throw away" objects. Cardinal Ratzinger btw is as fit as fiddle.

Well, like I said, I have no interest in the catholic church, I don't believe they are as bad as everyone makes out, but as seen in their past, setting up an institute lie that and putting tradition before doctrine means that they will inevitably have problems but a mass conspiracy is unlikely, hidden motives maybe, but not large scale, I am, however more of a fan of this new pope, he speaks with at least some social sense, too bad it theological sense.

Very interesting.

I assume you know why the Pope resigned?

Yes, but like I said, I'm not catholic, I'm a reformed baptist and evangelist, Calvinist and empathise with some puritans, as far from catholic as you can get, I don't believe the popes position to be an appointment from god and it sickens me to think that they can possibly believe that his is fulfilling the role of Peter who I think would be discussed at the thought. Rant over, he resigned due to Ill health

Tell everyone then. I am still under strict orders not to. I really would but fake suicide not for me.

Decent chap, got tipped off at a dinner with order he was the gov of, next pope, etc. I was shown some bits and bobs that would blow your mind. He was going to spill the beans as it were. Sorry to piss on your fire and shit but whichever gods you pay homage to are long gone. They may be back one day but I doubt it. I can't give anymore hints can I.

As for the muslims, they are fighting hard mostly male though and regard women as a "throw away" objects. Cardinal Ratzinger btw is as fit as fiddle.

Well, like I said, I have no interest in the catholic church, I don't believe they are as bad as everyone makes out, but as seen in their past, setting up an institute lie that and putting tradition before doctrine means that they will inevitably have problems but a mass conspiracy is unlikely, hidden motives maybe, but not large scale, I am, however more of a fan of this new pope, he speaks with at least some social sense, too bad it theological sense.

Muslims on the other hand interest me a lot, I would like to be able to speak to one of the decent ones, at this moment I have friends who could be shot at any moment by boku haram in Nigeria but I don't hold any hat towards them they just need their minds opened.

It has often dawned on me that should I go to "heaven" there are going to be some angry ranting people there full of hate for non believers, not exactly what their Lord had in mind during his selfless mission to help us....ahem.
It has also become apparent that should I go to "hell" there will be some quite astute and interesting people to hang with.

Allow me to generalise a little to argue my point. Of the people I know and mix with day to day about half have religious beliefs. I detect no difference between the two groups in their relations with their fellow man. Both groups show kindness, pity and love. Both groups also demonstrate anger, greed, hate, spite, and general mean spirit. It is striking that no amount of religious education has changed the basic tenets of human behaviour. Generally you have to conclude that people can only be fans of religion but never followers. It is easy to go to church and claim a moral high ground it is much harder to follow the teachings of a messiah and embrace the true message of unconditional love for man. That is an issue that religious people will always struggle with internally, it is impossible to resolve.

I have been a Christian since I was 17 and, honestly while it sounds sickly sweet, God changed my life. I struggled to find purpose, meaning and happiness throughout my teenage years and since I had the conversion experience of meeting and finding a personal relationship with God things haven't always been easy but I have had that peace & joy that goes beyond understanding.

I think you misunderstand faith. Faith isn't always believing in spite of no evidence. Faith is rarely stupid. I have faith that my parents won't disown me, I don't know that for sure but I have faith based on past experience of my parents character and actions that this will be the case.

When it comes to faith in God, it's not a case of jumping towards a landing spot that I don't know is there. It's a case of jumping towards a landing spot that has always been there before. In all my study of scripture and experience with God, He has never let me down and His Word has never been found wanting. So that's what faith means to me, I can't see it but I know it anyway.

The Bible describes faith perfectly in Hebrews (11:1)

'Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see.'

I always appreciate discussion about this and will answer any questions though I'd prefer it if people kept things civil as more often than not people just say nasty things to you rather than debate you in my experience.

1) do you believe the world is only 6,000 years old? If so how do you explain scientific proof of things on the earth prior to that. I.e dinosaur fossils, rock formations etc

2) do you not believe in darwins theory of evolution? If so then how do you feel when met with factual evidence of evolution in the animal kingdom?

3) if god created everything and his love is for all, then why did he create such things as AIDS and cancer?

4) surely anyone willing to devote their life to a religion would do a bit of historical research considering there are no historically valued documents saying that anyone has ever seen or heard God. You would then realise that there are hundreds upon hundreds of religions created BEFORE Christianity that had the following similarities from their "Jesus"

- virgin birth
- born December 25th
- 12 desciples
- walked around performing miracles
- sold out by friend
- crucified
- layed to rest for 3 days
- resurrected

In fact it seems upon closer inspection the Christian faith is a direct copy of the Egyptian religion and Jesus based on "Horus" the sun god....

5) don't you think it's far more likely that the Christian religion is a Mayan astrological story anthropomorphised in order to give the characters life and then used by the church (government) to exercise control over its people. Read about the crusades?

Ha, ha, ha, ha.
Everyone is a cynic. To religious believers it's called faith to non believers they like to spout science. Who knows who is right?

Ha, ha, ha, ha.
Everyone is a cynic. To religious believers it's called faith to non believers they like to spout science. Who knows who is right?

"Spout science"

Yeah because science is such a ridiculous notion

Very interesting.

I assume you know why the Pope resigned?

He found out its better to come to Britain and live on benefits.

The beauty of faith is that you have no doubts. Irrespective of what seems compelling proof to others.

Ha, ha, ha, ha.
Everyone is a cynic. To religious believers it's called faith to non believers they like to spout science. Who knows who is right?

"Spout science"

Yeah because science is such a ridiculous notion

science is limited faith is not.

The beauty of faith is that you have no doubts. Irrespective of what seems compelling proof to others.

That's fine. I'm not saying any different. I've asked some questions as he said we could.

Faith is one thing, ignoring compelling evidence is another. Can you imagine if we had judges throwing out scientific evidence and DNA proof of murderers and rapists simply by saying "I don't believe he did it". There would be uproar and rightly so.

When I was 8 years old, I had complete faith in Santa Claus. Although it was a nice feeling at the time the harsh reality needed to be faced up to.

I love the thought of religion and I love the message most of it preaches. I just don't understand why people need a religion to be nice, just be nice.

Ha, ha, ha, ha.
Everyone is a cynic. To religious believers it's called faith to non believers they like to spout science. Who knows who is right?

"Spout science"

Yeah because science is such a ridiculous notion

science is limited faith is not.

That's a nonsense saying. That's like saying science is limited but imagining I could fly is not - so I can.

http://www.economist.com/node/155244

This is a great watch for anyone who has any doubts......




Part 1 - http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Kla-BcN8u8Q

Part 2 - http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-KVoYJ5YSzM&feature=relmfu

Part 3 - http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=relmfu&v=oUX5ovRuWNs

Ha, ha, ha, ha.
Everyone is a cynic. To religious believers it's called faith to non believers they like to spout science. Who knows who is right?

"Spout science"

Yeah because science is such a ridiculous notion

science is limited faith is not.

That's a nonsense saying. That's like saying science is limited but imagining I could fly is not - so I can.

not really

science requires proof

faith does not

before there is scientific proof a scientist would have a theory based on an idea thats his/her faith.

science requires things that faith does not, science answers questions. Faith gives security, belonging and hope.

you cant compare science and religion, I dont really understand why people do, two completely different entities.

I like science, I enjoy it I think the stuff we can do and are discovering is fascinating, I dont understand why it has any bearing on religion or faith.

I think scientists who go out to disprove religion are strange people on the same view I think creationists are weird but each to their own.

This is a great watch for anyone who has any doubts......




Part 1 - http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Kla-BcN8u8Q

Part 2 - http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-KVoYJ5YSzM&feature=relmfu

Part 3 - http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=relmfu&v=oUX5ovRuWNs

yes seen it before fascinating

are you religious?

if not why do you care what other people do what makes you think you have a right to tell people what they believe is wrong or flawed? its not your life, I dont interfere with your life why do you feel you have to interfere with mine?

I assume your an atheist or non-believer I dont have a go at you for that. I dont think your stupid or weak willed.

Roath if you want to wind people up about Cardiff go for it it doesnt bother me, though leave this stuff alone.

Ha, ha, ha, ha.
Everyone is a cynic. To religious believers it's called faith to non believers they like to spout science. Who knows who is right?

"Spout science"

Yeah because science is such a ridiculous notion

science is limited faith is not.

That's a nonsense saying. That's like saying science is limited but imagining I could fly is not - so I can.

not really

science requires proof

faith does not

before there is scientific proof a scientist would have a theory based on an idea thats his/her faith.

science requires things that faith does not, science answers questions. Faith gives security, belonging and hope.

you cant compare science and religion, I dont really understand why people do, two completely different entities.

I like science, I enjoy it I think the stuff we can do and are discovering is fascinating, I dont understand why it has any bearing on religion or faith.

I think scientists who go out to disprove religion are strange people on the same view I think creationists are weird but each to their own.

Nobody is comparing science and religion. People are stating the fact that science debunks a lot of what is believed in these religions. It's the lack of proof needed in religion that would tell a intelligent man that religion is a flawed concept. Hence why we have hundreds of religions.

I like you admire the notions of religion. However that's neither here nor there. I also admire the notions of Santa Claus and I think it is used in a very similar way, to control.

The fact you don't see a link between a discussion of religion and science is baffling however.

This is a great watch for anyone who has any doubts......




Part 1 - http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Kla-BcN8u8Q

Part 2 - http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-KVoYJ5YSzM&feature=relmfu

Part 3 - http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=relmfu&v=oUX5ovRuWNs

yes seen it before fascinating

are you religious?

if not why do you care what other people do what makes you think you have a right to tell people what they believe is wrong or flawed? its not your life, I dont interfere with your life why do you feel you have to interfere with mine?

I assume your an atheist or non-believer I dont have a go at you for that. I dont think your stupid or weak willed.

Roath if you want to wind people up about Cardiff go for it it doesnt bother me, though leave this stuff alone.

No I'm not religious.

This is a discussion on religion and our opinions on it is it not? What have I said that would wind anyone up? The OP invited questions on and I asked some very fair ones, I then went on to give my opinion on religion and did it fairly and with factual evidence ever since I've been fielding questions on the validity of science which is incredible in itself.... However not offensive.

Why you think you can tell me what subjects to post on is incredible. If you don't like my opinion then ignore me.

Ha, ha, ha, ha.
Everyone is a cynic. To religious believers it's called faith to non believers they like to spout science. Who knows who is right?

"Spout science"

Yeah because science is such a ridiculous notion

science is limited faith is not.

That's a nonsense saying. That's like saying science is limited but imagining I could fly is not - so I can.

not really

science requires proof

faith does not

before there is scientific proof a scientist would have a theory based on an idea thats his/her faith.

science requires things that faith does not, science answers questions. Faith gives security, belonging and hope.

you cant compare science and religion, I dont really understand why people do, two completely different entities.

I like science, I enjoy it I think the stuff we can do and are discovering is fascinating, I dont understand why it has any bearing on religion or faith.

I think scientists who go out to disprove religion are strange people on the same view I think creationists are weird but each to their own.

Nobody is comparing science and religion. People are stating the fact that science debunks a lot of what is believed in these religions. It's the lack of proof needed in religion that would tell a intelligent man that religion is a flawed concept. Hence why we have hundreds of religions.

I like you admire the notions of religion. However that's neither here nor there. I also admire the notions of Santa Claus and I think it is used in a very similar way, to control.

The fact you don't see a link between a discussion of religion and science is baffling however.

why baffling, God created this world everything on this world, in the universe and beyond is all created by God. God created us intelligent beings with the ability to explore and ask questions which creates science.

what people like you who raise this issue forgets is that the bible wasnt written yesterday and was written without the current scientific knowledge, is it really surprising that its not wholly accurate?

youre not regarding the concept of faith instrumental to any religion, for some reason you have made it irrelevant like most scientists, probably because it cannot be measured.

This is a great watch for anyone who has any doubts......




Part 1 - http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Kla-BcN8u8Q

Part 2 - http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-KVoYJ5YSzM&feature=relmfu

Part 3 - http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=relmfu&v=oUX5ovRuWNs

yes seen it before fascinating

are you religious?

if not why do you care what other people do what makes you think you have a right to tell people what they believe is wrong or flawed? its not your life, I dont interfere with your life why do you feel you have to interfere with mine?

I assume your an atheist or non-believer I dont have a go at you for that. I dont think your stupid or weak willed.

Roath if you want to wind people up about Cardiff go for it it doesnt bother me, though leave this stuff alone.

No I'm not religious.

This is a discussion on religion and our opinions on it is it not? What have I said that would wind anyone up? The OP invited questions on and I asked some very fair ones, I then went on to give my opinion on religion and did it fairly and with factual evidence ever since I've been fielding questions on the validity of science which is incredible in itself.... However not offensive.

Why you think you can tell me what subjects to post on is incredible. If you don't like my opinion then ignore me.

im not saying you cant have an opinion im saying take it seriously unlike 99% of your posts through many different pseudonyms.