Who is going to hell? An argument for the Bible, Religion and God. - Page 9 - Nubblies.net Forums

ninjaface · 09-21-2005, 02:00 AM

You just love to take an idea and fucking run away with it until your eyes bleed. For the most part, your opinions hold no value to me thus far. I'm simply biding my time.

I don't like how the word self-evident is being thrown around here.

self-evident: obvious without explanation or proof

You can not claim that specific arguments for the bible, religion, and god are self-evident without looking like a jackass. If all you can offer toward this argument are bible quotes and long, meandering notions then I ask that you sit out until you can offer something that is worthwhile.

AcTivE · 09-21-2005, 02:18 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ninjaface:
You just love to take an idea and fucking run away with it until your eyes bleed.

I love that you said that.

Quote:

Originally posted by ninjaface:
I ask that you sit out until you can offer something that is worthwhile.

Worthwhile? What is? Tell me that, and you will tell me what is divine. And I will be able to show you where it says it in the Bible.

Seriously, tell me something that is "worthwhile".

ninjaface · 09-21-2005, 02:29 AM

Scientific evidence that supports anything in the bible.

AcTivE · 09-21-2005, 02:49 AM

You should add a conclusion to that premise.

haha..oh my i make myself laugh. are you laughing too? you should be you dirty dog you. turn that frown upside down. flip it. there ya go..right over now.

Mr. Blonde · 09-21-2005, 03:25 AM

I'm with ninja on this one, i've always hated how people argue about having "faith" is truly believing, even though it's just blindly believing everything that is in some book. People can't handle the everday ugly truths of the world, so they create something to help rationalize it. Just like in Lucy Fur's sig.

AcTivE · 09-21-2005, 03:40 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr. Blonde:
Just like in Lucy Fur's sig.

Proof that branding works. This is a self evident truth. If you are told something enough times, you will believe it.

ninjaface · 09-21-2005, 03:41 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by AcTivE:
Seriously, tell me something that is "worthwhile".... and I will be able to show you where it says it in the Bible.

Quote:

Originally posted by ninjaface:
Scientific evidence that supports anything in the bible.

I'm waiting.

AcTivE · 09-21-2005, 03:44 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ninjaface:
then I ask that you sit out until you can offer something that is worthwhile.

Are you not asking for something that is worthwhile?

Are you saying that scientific evidence to you is worthwhile? I like to be clear, and I am not following.

ninjaface · 09-21-2005, 03:48 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ninjaface:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by AcTivE:
Seriously, tell me something that is "worthwhile".... and I will be able to show you where it says it in the Bible.

Quote:

Originally posted by ninjaface:
Scientific evidence that supports anything in the bible.

I'm waiting.[/quote]
I'm still waiting.

AcTivE · 09-21-2005, 04:15 AM

I'm sorry. If I do not clearly understand what you want, I will not be able to make a post that will be able to appropriately and sufficiently handle the natural expected value of a truthful and persuasive argument.

I will have to refrain from posting until you are at a point of being willing to meet me at a point.

Anything else would be an erroneous post passed on emotional "banter" that is driven by ignorance. And by ignorance, I mean lack of understanding. Just in case, you weren't.

it's a joke, but not really. Things don't need to be taken so seriously, but for sure if I'm going to argue about something, I need to know what I am arguing about.

ninjaface · 09-21-2005, 04:24 AM

How can you be lost at this point? I'll go ahead and break it down for you.

Quote:

Originally posted by AcTivE:
Are you not asking for something that is worthwhile?

Are you saying that scientific evidence to you is worthwhile? I like to be clear, and I am not following.

Yes I am asking for something worthwhile. Yes scientific evidence is worthwhile. I've said it, and quoted myself saying it. Here. I will quote myself saying it again of you are still at all unsure.

Quote:

Originally posted by AcTivE:
Seriously, tell me something that is "worthwhile".... and I will be able to show you where it says it in the Bible.

Quote:

Originally posted by ninjaface:
Scientific evidence that supports anything in the bible.

AcTivE · 09-21-2005, 04:30 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ninjaface:
How can you be lost at this point? I'll go ahead and break it down for you.

How can I be lost? Because I am not 100% certain. What do you think of that, huh? huh? Food for though, eh?

Now, even before I think about possibly approaching this, I think we are going to come across problems with the word, scientific evidence, so let's define that.

sci·en·tif·ic Audio pronunciation of "scientific" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (sn-tfk)
adj.

Of, relating to, or employing the methodology of science.

sci·ence Audio pronunciation of "science" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (sns)
n.

1.
1. The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.
2. Such activities restricted to a class of natural phenomena.
3. Such activities applied to an object of inquiry or study.
2. Methodological activity, discipline, or study: I've got packing a suitcase down to a science.
3. An activity that appears to require study and method: the science of purchasing.
4. Knowledge, especially that gained through experience.
5. Science Christian Science.

Interesting num 5 on science..wasn't expecting that. But besides the point..let me say what definitions I like, tell me if you approve.

I like definition number 4 of science. I think it is all encompassing, and could include the others.

So, I will provide you with devine proof, that a theory is absolutely true, by experience, and that will be scientific evidence, correct?

ninjaface · 09-21-2005, 04:41 AM

Number 4 is not an option. I'm sure, by using #4, you can provide me with divine proof. But by the same token, a dumbass hillbilly can provide you with proof of extraterrestrials. So throw number 4 out the fuckin window. The first definition seems like the best choice. But... come to think of it, I don't actually like the idea of choosing one of many definitions for one word for you to "prove" divinity. Instead, I'd like you to use the scientific method.

AcTivE · 09-21-2005, 05:11 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ninjaface:
Number 4 is not an option. I'm sure, by using #4, you can provide me with divine proof. But by the same token, a dumbass hillbilly can provide you with proof of extraterrestrials. So throw number 4 out the fuckin window. The first definition seems like the best choice. But... come to think of it, I don't actually like the idea of choosing one of many definitions for one word for you to "prove" divinity. Instead, I'd like you to use the scientific method.

First of all, I'd like to point out that you are adding emotional factor to this debate that does not need to be mentioned. It throws the perspective of the readers off ninjaface. When you say "a dumbass hillbilly can provide you wiwth proof of extraterrestrials", for some reason I get the idea that you place anyone that believes in any sort of "diety" is a dumb fuck.

I can understand the logic of where you might stand, but there is no reason to argue it if all you are going to do is bring up shit that has nothing to do with what we are talking about.

So, then, you want me to use definition number 2? Methodological activity?

Sounds good, but isn't that the same as number 4? Is not something methodical, something that is a method--something that is repeated, producing the same results?

BUT, really, all I'm asking now is--alright, tell me what the scientific method is--because is not what I just said--the scientific method?

Basically all in all, my point with this is going to end up being--science in a sense is a bunch of self evident truths that are realized. This is logical, logical is science, I will argue Bible is logical, but it needs to be taken into the consideration of "thought context" as opposed to a "materialistic context".

some of you will not get that, and that is fine..maybe i'm just really confident that I have a sense that I can seperate the two.

[edit] punctuation

[ September 21, 2005, 03:19 AM: Message edited by: AcTivE ]

ninjaface · 09-21-2005, 05:38 AM

I knew you were going to do that. I suggest simplicity, you reject it and get complicated.

Quote:

Originally posted by AcTivE:
So, then, you want me to use definition number 2? Methodological activity?

No. I said definition number one.

Quote:

Originally posted by AcTivE:
alright, tell me what the scientific method is

Introduction to the Scientific Method

The scientific method is the process by which scientists, collectively and over time, endeavor to construct an accurate (that is, reliable, consistent and non-arbitrary) representation of the world.

Recognizing that personal and cultural beliefs influence both our perceptions and our interpretations of natural phenomena, we aim through the use of standard procedures and criteria to minimize those influences when developing a theory. As a famous scientist once said, "Smart people (like smart lawyers) can come up with very good explanations for mistaken points of view." In summary, the scientific method attempts to minimize the influence of bias or prejudice in the experimenter when testing an hypothesis or a theory.
I. The scientific method has four steps

1. Observation and description of a phenomenon or group of phenomena.

2. Formulation of an hypothesis to explain the phenomena. In physics, the hypothesis often takes the form of a causal mechanism or a mathematical relation.

3. Use of the hypothesis to predict the existence of other phenomena, or to predict quantitatively the results of new observations.

4. Performance of experimental tests of the predictions by several independent experimenters and properly performed experiments.

If the experiments bear out the hypothesis it may come to be regarded as a theory or law of nature (more on the concepts of hypothesis, model, theory and law below). If the experiments do not bear out the hypothesis, it must be rejected or modified. What is key in the description of the scientific method just given is the predictive power (the ability to get more out of the theory than you put in; see Barrow, 1991) of the hypothesis or theory, as tested by experiment. It is often said in science that theories can never be proved, only disproved. There is always the possibility that a new observation or a new experiment will conflict with a long-standing theory.

Quote:

Originally posted by AcTivE:
Basically all in all, my point with this is going to end up being--science in a sense is a bunch of self evident truths that are realized. This is logical, logical is science, I will argue Bible is logical, but it needs to be taken into the consideration of "thought context" as opposed to a "materialistic context".

some of you will not get that, and that is fine..maybe i'm just really confident that I have a sense that I can seperate the two.

I know what you mean by "thought context" but that is, once again, personal opinion and will not prove anything. I'm talking science here, not what anyone's thoughts are on a book.

So please. If you will. Use the scientific method layed out above to prove "divinity".

jbonham · 09-21-2005, 10:50 AM

Well I am back at work and checked nubblies, so I thought i would add my thoughts.

The problem with applying the scientific method is that it takes direct experimentation. Well, if something happened 2000 years ago, isn't the only way to prove the reality of the event through records of the time period? One cannot say that the Roman Empire did not exist because of the outlasting impressions it had on society and all the architectural and historical proofs seen even today.

The only evidence we have today of Jesus' existence are books written by men who followed Christ's side. These books are written by eyewitnesses to the divine proof that Ninjaface seeks in this thread.

Some say "What if there is this great conspiracy of the church just to rule the world?" Well the catholic church has strong-armed people into belief when leadership was in the wrong hands, but that is also the reason for people such as Martin Luther, John Wesley, and various other people trying to bring the truth to the masses.
These people saw the eyewitness account and went to tell about it.

The scientific method will never prove everything in the world. It like other things is a guide to test observations. Well, if you can't observe then you can't use the scientific mehtod.

Mr. Blonde · 09-21-2005, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by AcTivE:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Mr. Blonde:
Just like in Lucy Fur's sig.

Proof that branding works. This is a self evident truth. If you are told something enough times, you will believe it.[/quote]
Hey, you condescending fuck. I've held that opinion by myself, i created by myself. Lucy Fur's been on this board for what, a few months? I've had that opinion for years, since I finally got out of our bible belt god imposing area and was finally allowed to think for myself. I'm not just taking that perspective because i've "heard it so many times", in fact there's almost nobody i know who agrees with me from this area, which means i have to deal with close minded people like you all the time.

Want to talk about branding? You believe in the Bible because you have been told that it is right, so you should believe in it. I mean why not, right? Its the worlds most popular religion, and it has been for almost two millennia, so it MUST be correct.

Just lke ninja is saying, you can't provide any solid scientific proof. I like to rely on COMMON SENSE. Do I believe there is a higher being? Yes, I do. There are many things in life that seem far too complex to just "happen". However, I don't think that has hardly anything to do with the bible. The bible and scientific evolutionary proof contradict each other, so i'm going to go with something that actually makes sense.

Have you ever seen a REAL miracle, active? I'm not talking about childbirth or anything gay like that, i'm talking about somebody being raised from the dead in front of your eyes, or a pillar of fire appearing out of the sky. Have you?

[ September 21, 2005, 09:51 AM: Message edited by: Mr. Blonde ]

Lucy Fur · 09-21-2005, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr. Blonde:
Lucy Fur's been on this board for what, a few months?

ah yes, but i have a major impact on everything i touch

MAGICLIT · 09-21-2005, 01:24 PM

Touch me please.

AcTivE · 09-21-2005, 01:34 PM

[quote]Originally posted by Mr. Blonde:
[quote]Originally posted by AcTivE:
[qb]

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr. Blonde:
[qb]I've had that opinion for years

Want to talk about branding? You believe in the Bible because you have been told that it is right, so you should believe in it. I mean why not, right? Its the worlds most popular religion, and it has been for almost two millennia, so it MUST be correct.

Just lke ninja is saying, you can't provide any solid scientific proof. I like to rely on COMMON SENSE. Do I believe there is a higher being? Yes, I do. There are many things in life that seem far too complex to just "happen". However, I don't think that has hardly anything to do with the bible. The bible and scientific evolutionary proof contradict each other, so i'm going to go with something that actually makes sense.

Have you ever seen a REAL miracle, active? I'm not talking about childbirth or anything gay like that, i'm talking about somebody being raised from the dead in front of your eyes, or a pillar of fire appearing out of the sky. Have you?

First of all, I'm going to say it doesn't surprise me that you hold that type of view. I still hold the opinion of you that you are the type of person that is influenced by branding. Look at yourself and tell me that it is not there. I'd say what drives you in life is looking good, being cool, and attention. Just like a coke can.

Common sense? That's where I'm trying to head with this, but for the most part it leads to irrational name calling and closed minds.

Which, btw, I'm sorry you feel I'm close minded. Maybe you can help open it to your views that I'm not seeing. What is it you are arguing exactly?

and a *real* life miracle. thats what it takes? how many "miracles" need to happen before the evidence of a truth stand?

I'm not going to be able to provide any materialstic support that there is absolutely a higher being that created us. Rather, I want to support the idea that you can realize that there is a "greater being" just by looking at your thought process.

Probably not what either of you are looking for though, so I won't continue unless somebody wants me to. Basically I want to argue that God IS love, and you can *see* that once you look at it, and realize the truth behind a bunch of words put in sequence.

09-21-2005, 01:41 PM

If you examine anything to a certain degree, you can prove that you really don't know.

Example:

If you try to assume that all the very basic assumptions from which you base all knowledge upon (the existence of yourself, free will, the existence of others) to be true, you may be assuming these things on pure faith. What evidence do you have that anything around you is real? Everything around you must be in some form of doubt.

To Blonde: You claim to not be affected by what you hear or what is around you.

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr. Blonde:
I finally got out of our bible belt god imposing area and was finally allowed to think for myself. I'm not just taking that perspective because i've "heard it so many times", in fact there's almost nobody i know who agrees with me from this area, which means i have to deal with close minded people like you all the time.

You know how many times I hear this exact thing?

"I got to college and now I think for myself and I don't believe in God... ignorant people believe in God." This is just as ignorant and hipocritical as anything. If anything, I'd say Active is being more open minded than most college students because he's putting philisophical effort into his endevors. You instantly dismiss anyone who tries to argue for God as ignorant, and you assume the stereotypical college position because of "Common Sense." Guess what buddy, common sense is often wrong, and entire societies may believe something even though it is blatantly wrong. Maybe you didn't mean common sense, but you certainly don't sound like you are truely thinking for yourself if you use it as an example.

Mr. Blonde · 09-21-2005, 01:43 PM

Note: I would like to get someone on the board to find any number of topics where FC actually agrees with me. As I have stated before, If I would say that the sky is blue, and everyone else is wrong, he would somehow try to tell everyone that it is, in fact, green.

FC gets off on disagreeing with me on every thing I talk about on here. Anybody else notice this trend? Because of this, i'm not even going to read the above post, because you are wrong. I say you're wrong, i know you're wrong.

[ September 21, 2005, 11:44 AM: Message edited by: Mr. Blonde ]

AcTivE · 09-21-2005, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr. Blonde:
Note: I would like to get someone on the board to find any number of topics where FC actually agrees with me. As I have stated before, If I would say that the sky is blue, and everyone else is wrong, he would somehow try to tell everyone that it is, in fact, green.

the sky is green if you are wearing green tinted sunglasses

AcTivE · 09-21-2005, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr. Blonde:
Note: I would like to get someone on the board to find any number of topics where FC actually agrees with me. As I have stated before, If I would say that the sky is blue, and everyone else is wrong, he would somehow try to tell everyone that it is, in fact, green.

Oh, and btw, this has nothing to do with the argument. I'm in like 3 classes right now about reasoning..and it seems to be pretty clear you aren't doing anything but validating your statement by attacking DJ FC. Who is being close minded?

Of course offense creates closed minds..so I better stop. Don't want to hurt your ego too bad. I'm not am I?

MAGICLIT · 09-21-2005, 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by MAGICLIT:
Touch me please.

Lucy...........

09-21-2005, 02:49 AM	#204 (permalink)
AcTivE 1 thing leads to another. Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 2,012 Internets: -2654	You should add a conclusion to that premise. haha..oh my i make myself laugh. are you laughing too? you should be you dirty dog you. turn that frown upside down. flip it. there ya go..right over now.
	___________________ 3:o) horned creatures...wat wat ___________________

09-21-2005, 03:25 AM	#205 (permalink)
Mr. Blonde Spice Master Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 17,969 Internets: 284106	I'm with ninja on this one, i've always hated how people argue about having "faith" is truly believing, even though it's just blindly believing everything that is in some book. People can't handle the everday ugly truths of the world, so they create something to help rationalize it. Just like in Lucy Fur's sig.
	Psychedelics are illegal not because a loving government is concerned that you may jump out of a third story window. Psychedelics are illegal because they dissolve opinion structures and culturally laid down models of behavior and information processing. ― Terence McKenna

09-21-2005, 04:15 AM	#210 (permalink)
AcTivE 1 thing leads to another. Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 2,012 Internets: -2654	I'm sorry. If I do not clearly understand what you want, I will not be able to make a post that will be able to appropriately and sufficiently handle the natural expected value of a truthful and persuasive argument. I will have to refrain from posting until you are at a point of being willing to meet me at a point. Anything else would be an erroneous post passed on emotional "banter" that is driven by ignorance. And by ignorance, I mean lack of understanding. Just in case, you weren't. it's a joke, but not really. Things don't need to be taken so seriously, but for sure if I'm going to argue about something, I need to know what I am arguing about.
	___________________ 3:o) horned creatures...wat wat ___________________

09-21-2005, 01:24 PM	#219 (permalink)
MAGICLIT Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: city of sin Posts: 2,753 Internets: 10	Touch me please.
	I am all in favor of a ruling class, especially since I rule.

09-21-2005, 01:43 PM	#222 (permalink)
Mr. Blonde Spice Master Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 17,969 Internets: 284106	Note: I would like to get someone on the board to find any number of topics where FC actually agrees with me. As I have stated before, If I would say that the sky is blue, and everyone else is wrong, he would somehow try to tell everyone that it is, in fact, green. FC gets off on disagreeing with me on every thing I talk about on here. Anybody else notice this trend? Because of this, i'm not even going to read the above post, because you are wrong. I say you're wrong, i know you're wrong. [ September 21, 2005, 11:44 AM: Message edited by: Mr. Blonde ]
	Psychedelics are illegal not because a loving government is concerned that you may jump out of a third story window. Psychedelics are illegal because they dissolve opinion structures and culturally laid down models of behavior and information processing. ― Terence McKenna

09-21-2005, 02:00 AM	#201 (permalink)
ninjaface Level 20 Holothetan Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Space Posts: 5,245 Internets: 210144	You just love to take an idea and fucking run away with it until your eyes bleed. For the most part, your opinions hold no value to me thus far. I'm simply biding my time. I don't like how the word self-evident is being thrown around here. self-evident: obvious without explanation or proof You can not claim that specific arguments for the bible, religion, and god are self-evident without looking like a jackass. If all you can offer toward this argument are bible quotes and long, meandering notions then I ask that you sit out until you can offer something that is worthwhile.

09-21-2005, 02:29 AM	#203 (permalink)
ninjaface Level 20 Holothetan Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Space Posts: 5,245 Internets: 210144	Scientific evidence that supports anything in the bible.

09-21-2005, 04:41 AM	#213 (permalink)
ninjaface Level 20 Holothetan Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Space Posts: 5,245 Internets: 210144	Number 4 is not an option. I'm sure, by using #4, you can provide me with divine proof. But by the same token, a dumbass hillbilly can provide you with proof of extraterrestrials. So throw number 4 out the fuckin window. The first definition seems like the best choice. But... come to think of it, I don't actually like the idea of choosing one of many definitions for one word for you to "prove" divinity. Instead, I'd like you to use the scientific method.

09-21-2005, 10:50 AM	#216 (permalink)
jbonham Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 114 Internets: 10	Well I am back at work and checked nubblies, so I thought i would add my thoughts. The problem with applying the scientific method is that it takes direct experimentation. Well, if something happened 2000 years ago, isn't the only way to prove the reality of the event through records of the time period? One cannot say that the Roman Empire did not exist because of the outlasting impressions it had on society and all the architectural and historical proofs seen even today. The only evidence we have today of Jesus' existence are books written by men who followed Christ's side. These books are written by eyewitnesses to the divine proof that Ninjaface seeks in this thread. Some say "What if there is this great conspiracy of the church just to rule the world?" Well the catholic church has strong-armed people into belief when leadership was in the wrong hands, but that is also the reason for people such as Martin Luther, John Wesley, and various other people trying to bring the truth to the masses. These people saw the eyewitness account and went to tell about it. The scientific method will never prove everything in the world. It like other things is a guide to test observations. Well, if you can't observe then you can't use the scientific mehtod.