Oh. My. God.

Sorry to add yet another point to a very long post but I feel very strongly about this and have only just noticed it.

JediStryker, you assert that your nation was founded upon Christian ideals. You're gravely mistaken, and I'll provide some evidence as soon as I can.

I saw an interesting quote on the Stardestroyer.net website:

"Donate blood, donate money, stay informed, and then by all means, live the life that others want to take away from you. Live free. Read controversial books. Watch pornography or read dirty magazines if you want to. Listen to rock and roll music. Encourage women to wear short skirts (you know how those religious fundamentalists hate that, and how much we love it). Keep your church and state separate. Defend your civil liberties."

I'm not giving it unequivocal endorsement and I have yet to think it through. However, I thought it was an interesting contribution, whether or not I decide to agree with it.

 

Just saw your post Stryker. I apologise for the delay I'll probably take in reading & replying to it, please bear with me

 

Okay, first off, a link which both proves the USA was founded as a secular state and shows that Hitler was a Christian:

http://stardestroyer.net/Creationism/Morality/Hitler.shtml

Look in the two boxes, particularly at the references to the Founding Fathers. Also, another page about Old Testament atrocities:

http://stardestroyer.net/Creationism/BiblicalMorality/Ref-Violence.html

Like I said, I don't unequivocally support everything I'm linking to or quoting. I simply believe they may be interesting, if not especially tactful, contributions to the discussion.

NB. Please don't feel I'm hiding behind my age, or anything of the sort. I simply mentioned it alongside Bouty's comment that he was only a kid. I think age is pretty irrelevant on a message board such as this.

Like I said, I'm pretty short of time right now but I'll try to reply to your post later.

MTFBWY

 

DS,

Went to the website. Interesting. I am not going to turn this into a 'Creationism vs. Evolution' debate. The person who wrote that page was obviously biased, and he got a few things mixed up. But many scientists who propose evolution also embrace the intelligent designer theory, which is simply that God put the evolutionary process into motion.

The problem with these kinds of things, is that if you have chosen not to believe in God, you are probably going to disregard anything someone who professes to be a Christian says. Which is something that, if you are a true scientist, you know is a very unscientific stance. Part of science is to stand back and look at things in a completely open way.

By the way, nothing in scripture says that the Earth is the center of the solar system. That was a doctrine that was adopted by the Catholic church, but they made it up.

1. Let me do something here quickly. I want to seperate my religion from the Catholic religion. I am not Catholic. I would probably be closest to Protestant, which pushes against the kinds of structured and unbending views of the Catholic church. I have never persecuted science, have never killed anyone in the name of my religion, and do not discriminate against those who do not embrace my religion.

2. As much as the writer of the website would hate to hear this, Evolution is a theory. Most of the evidence that supports it has often been later proven to be something else entirely. That is not to say that it's not true, because honestly, it's probably impossible to disprove it. Maybe it is true. But does that disprove the existence of God? Absolutely not.

3. The Old Testament, as much as many religions hate to admit it, is full of many stories that were written to explain the things that the people of that time did not understand. Fortunately, the principles of the Christian religion are based upon the events of the New Testament, which has been verified in many ways by the scientific community, from ancient documents to geographical landmarks.

4. Evolution, and science in general, cannot explain the existence of the universe as a whole, and never will. You have to accept that something has to have existed for an eternity, whether it be some form of matter or a supreme being. It had to have, unless you believe that a long time ago something just <poof> appeared out of nowhere without any sort of intervention. So what has existed for an eternity? Electrons? They've just always 'been there'? Or is it possible that God, who exists outside of time, started the whole process by creating something that eventually evolved into what he have today? That makes more sense to me than anything else.

Anyway, there is no way to prove either idea. Part of religion is faith, something that science is violently against.

One last thing. Science and religion can work together. The theory of Creationism has been postulated as a scientific theory. Programs have been written that show exactly how it could have worked. Scientists have found evidence of a great flood that would have covered the Earth. Does that mean it really happened? Who knows. But science isn't perfect, and will always leave unanswered questions. That's life. I love science. I will always look at it as a way to understand the intricacies of the miracle of God's creation (however it came about.)

 

DS, we keep posting eachother at odd times. I'll look at these other links later.

I don't think that you're hiding behind your age. Honestly, when I was your age, I did exactly the same thing, and I was steadfast in my belief in the fallacies of religion. But as I got older, and I opened my mind and my heart to religion, I realized that, just as much mentally as emotionally, that it made sense for me. That may never happen for you. But understand, I respect your ideas and beliefs, and your age has nothing to do with it. Like I said, you seem to be intelligent and well thought out, if not altogether understanding of religion, which at your age is totally expected.

 

""Hitler's actions were un-Christian, therefore he was not a true Christian, even if he claimed to be one": I suppose that would depend on how you define "true Christian". The medieval Catholics did everything Hitler did and more; does this mean they weren't "true Christians" either?"

I don't believe that Catholic leaders of old were true Christians.

"One Catholic actually E-mailed me to argue that Hitler's actions were far worse than those of the Catholic church, as if gas chambers are so much worse than hacking a "witch"'s breasts off, violating her with heated metal instruments, and then tearing her limbs out of their sockets on the rack!"

Any action that promotes violence is un-Christianlike. (Unless it is in the defense of someone else, like in defense of our country.) Jesus was a pacifist, and preached against violence. The Catholic church was wrong, and that is one of the reasons I am not Catholic.

"I define a Christian as one who believes that Jesus Christ was the Messiah."

That definition comes from someone who seems to be violently anti-religion.

"Others define it far more narrowly, so that they can exclude people like Hitler and Mengele. But if they are to use such a narrow definition, then they must be willing to admit that most self-professed "Christians" throughout history have not been truly Christian. Either way, they certainly couldn't call them atheists."

Christian: Someone who admits that he/she is a sinner, and who accepts that Jesus died for their sins and was the son of the God. Upon this realization and profession, this person then lives his/her life in the best way he/she can, putting others before himself/herself regardless of race, religion, or creed. This person tries to be good (ie; doesn't kill, doesn't cheat, doesn't force others to do things they don't want to) but acknowledges that he/she is inherintly bad and repents of the bad things that he/she does through Jesus.

And yes, many people in the past who have claimed to do things in the name of God and Christianity were going against the true views of Christianity. That doesn't mean that the religion is wrong, those people are.

Hitler was not a Christian in the fact that the things he did were not Christianly. I could claim to be black, but that doesn't make me so.

____________


The idea that the US was designed as a secular state is a new idea that has surface onluy in the past fifty years or so. It is based mostly on the writings of some of the Founding Fathers that, taken completely out of context, even then don't indicate a secular state so much as a free state.

After living in a country where Catholicism was the Royal Church and any other views outside of those of the Royal Chruch were persecuted, often violently. Our Founding Fathers saw the New World as a place where they could practice their religion freely, without the oppression of the government forcing them to follow one structured religion that most of them didn't agree with anyway. (The Founding Fathers were predominantly Protestant.)

When the Colonies came up with the idea of a government that supported freedom of religion, their goal was to create a government that did not force one religion on the people it governed. That does not mean a secular government, it means a government that has not embodied any one religion as the state religion. The idea of 'seperation of church and state' came from a letter written by the very religion John Adams, if I remember correctly, and all it was stating was that the United States government had to keep itself seperated from one specific religious organization, not religion as a whole.

If you look at the documentation of the period, it is very clear that the principles of God and that he had a lot to do with the new United States, were accepted almost unquestioningly. 'One Nation under God' is an idea that was coined by our Founding Fathers.

Not to insult the person who wrote that page, but it's fairly obvious that, if he did research the founding of the U

 

In defense of History, the National Church of England was, the Church of England.

Oh and in case you find the amusing the first state to be founded on religious tolerence was Maryland, a safe haven for Catholics.

History thanks you for your cooperation.

 

Church of England. Gotcha.

The second sentence, I don't get.

 

The first colony to allow freedom fo Religion was Maryland. The Puritans in New England came here to avoid religious persecution, but then started it right back up again once they got here. Conneticut and Rhode Island were both started by people on the run from the Puritans because they disagreed with certain beliefs.

Maryland was started as a safe haven for Catholics and also allowed other religions freedom of worship.

mmkay?

 

Okay, gotcha.

Have a cookie.

 

There are, again, several posts that warrant a reply. N.B. we must be particularly careful to remain respectful of each others beliefs because there's a thread in Communications declaring that there's a big crackdown on anything religious-related.

----FIRST POST----

1. I don't want to turn this into Creationism vs Evolution + BigBang either. I find the subject fairly boring actually and it's only the Morality pages that interest me. I respect them because all through my schooling etc I've been taught Christianity as the archetype of morality and righteousness and it was very enlightening to see things from the opposite perspective.

2. I have no problem at all with the idea that God put the Big Bang into motion. Big Bang theories in fact seem perfectly compatible with a single moment of creation. Nor do I have any problem with the idea that God created the Earth through the evolution process. However, I do believe the scientific evidence that there was a Big Bang and there was an evolution process, as opposed to taking religious teachings literally.

3. "...you'll probably disregard anything someone who professes to be a Christian says". It's pretty impossible to have a discussion or debate without respecting or at least comprehending the other's arguments. I don't like ever having a closed mind, and I will always try to give your arguments due consideration. I may not believe in religion but I never ignore it or hold it in contempt (totally useless fact of the day - religious education which we have here is one of my top three subjects).

4. I don't know the Bible very well, so thanks for correcting me on that point about the Catholic church inventing the Earth-centric universe.

As far as my atheistic beliefs go, I don't believe in an ultimate deity but I may believe in an ultimate purpose for the physical universe: to produce consciousness, so that one or more viewpoints can perceive it. That has happened on Earth in the human brain (and debatably in the brains of other animals too) so purpose-wise, the Earth may still be the center of the universe. My theories are probably of little interest to you, I'll try to get back on topic here

(a) I wasn't under the impression that you were Catholic. Your belief in justification by faith rather than by good deeds is certainly a Protestant idea (it was first emphasised by Martin Luther).

I was not suggesting that you were a religious discriminator or persecutor. Even if you were Catholic, I still wouldn't think that.

(b) Evolution is indeed only a theory, but an important point to note is that imperfections in it are not automatic proof of Creation theory. As far as the question of God is concerned, if evolution was accepted as the irrefutable truth it would not disparage the existence of God.

(c) I accept that Christianity has mostly moved away from the Old Testament, which contains numerous atrocities, injustices, bad principles, inaccurate information, etc. However, the very worst principle IMO - justification by faith alone - takes its main basis from the New Testament, and there are still instances of racism etc. Look at the "Did Jesus fix the problem" page - again, I'm not kneeling and praying to an idol of Mr Wong and I don't agree with everything he says, but his site is useful reference material for what I'm trying to say; there's no point in me going through and quoting loads of examples when he's already done it.

(d) Here we come back to the existence of the universe as a whole, and the way there must be a Creator god. Unfortunately, I don't think he solves the problem. Having a Supreme Being simply takes the problem back a step. Instead of "where did the universe come from" we have "where did the supreme being who created the universe come from". The way I see it, it's not particularly helpful, nor does it say that the supreme being must be the Christian God.

I'll briefly expand upon my theory (not necessarily belief) of the cosmos. The pure substance of the void is consciousness, the perfect, ultimat

 

I'm going to stay out, jedistryker is doing very well.

btw, the catholic church got the terracentric view of the solar system from plato and aristotle.

Just learned this in astronomy.

 

i dont mean to get ya'll off your previous topic but there was one thing i wanted to point out to DS:

Having a Supreme Being simply takes the problem back a step. Instead of "where did the universe come from" we have "where did the supreme being who created the universe come from". The way I see it, it's not particularly helpful, nor does it say that the supreme being must be the Christian God.

i understand what you are getting at, but being a science freak i see a misunderstanding in your theory/beleif/statement about the origin of the universe and how god plays a role. let me read you an excerpt from my personal favorite: "A BREIF HISTORY OF TIME" (mind you, i dont COMPLETELY understand the theory of relativity, but i get the basic idea)
began on page 52:" does general relativity predict that our universe had a big bang, a beginning of time?...using the way light cones behave in general relativity, together with the fact that gravity is always attractive, he showed that a star collapsing under its own gravity is trapped in a region whose surface and volume must then shrink to zero size.all the matter in the star will be compressed into a region of zero volume so the...curvature of space-time become infanite...penrose's theorum had shown that any collapsing star MUST end in a sigularity, the time-reversed argument showed that any...expanding universe MUST have begun with singularity....it became more and more clear the universe must have had a beginning of time on the basis of einstein's general theory of relativity."
Hawkin goes onto state that if this theory is correct, then something MUST have had to create time because the theory of relativity can only reverse so far. it needs time to work but without time... it sounds confusing but it is really quite simple: according to the theory of relativity and the expanding universe, SOMETHING must have had to create time!
im not trying to convert anyone here, just stating the scientific facts.
as far as WHERE this supreme being came from, according to my faith that is not fo us to know. scientifically, it is not possible for the human mind to comprehend how this "being" got here. this being i refer to and beleive to be god.

 

hey uh..can someone please reply because i spent a long time on that last post....

 

up! up i command you! UUUP!

 

From the big Bang theory scientists also get the theory that outside of the expanding universe (the energy and mass that make up our galaxies) time and space do not exist and if God was outside the giant ball of matter and anti-matter that started the big bang it is impossible for us to comprehend him/her since God exists outside of any frame of reference we can understand. In short I don't think humans are able to comprehend where they came from.

 

From the big Bang theory scientists also get the theory that outside of the expanding universe (the energy and mass that make up our galaxies) time and space do not exist and if God was outside the giant ball of matter and anti-matter that started the big bang it is impossible for us to comprehend him/her since God exists outside of any frame of reference we can understand. In short I don't think humans are able to comprehend where they came from.

 

wow, i'm impressed by how level-headed you guys are while debating such a touchy topic. i've been involved in numerous religion debates, and not all of them have progressed so well. i have been flamed many times for what i believe and i think it's great that you guys can listen to each other's points and rationally and respectfully disagree with them.

that being said, i'd like to add a few things:

1) someone has said (sorry but i forgot who posted it) that the Old Testiment is inaccurate and full of atrocities. well, mainstream Christianity believes that the Old Testiment, being part of the Bible, is never outdated and will always apply. People's interpretation of the O.T. may have been incorrect, unfortunately, we won't know for sure until certain events in the New Testiment occur. but to say that one part of the Bible applies to life and one part doesn't is to negate the entire Bible. if you can pick and choose what is appropriate for you to believe, then how can you ever know what is true and what isn't? that's where faith comes in. you have to believe that what you're reading applies to your life as well and that you need to carry it out, or you will be lost. HOWEVER, Jesus Christ's resurrection changed many things in the Old Testiment. (it's been a while since i've had a Bible class, so i don't remember all very clearly) His resurrection means that we are no longer bound by the old laws of the Old Testiment. but that does not mean that those laws are inaccurate or no longer apply. they have been carried out for us by Jesus. it's a difficult concept to understand, but it is important to know that you cannot pick and choose what is relevant in the Bible.

2) If you believe what the Bible says, then you believe that no man can go to heaven except through Jesus. therefore, non-Christians cannot go to heaven. that is the whole point of Christianity. the Bible is here, available for you NOW to read and understand and believe. if you reject it, the decision is yours and the consequences are also yours. however, there are theories that there are varying degrees of hell. i think that for basically good people who happened to have never accepted Jesus as their savior, they may simply suffer spiritual death and cease to exist. but for those that have caused great suffering, such as Hitler and various mass murderers, etc., they may be cast into the firey pits that are described in the Bible and suffer the torture they inflicted on those in this world. if you proclaim yourself Christian but do not live the life of a Christ-like person, then you are no better than a liar. part of being Christian is to repent for your sins. to repent is to admit your sins and honestly want to be forgiven for them. if you honestly feel that you have sinned and want to change, you'll try your absolute hardest never to do it again. what Hitler did was claim he was Christian, but his heart did not follow his words. he did not repent of what he did, he didn't even think he was wrong. that is a false Christian, if you ask me.

so anyway, you guys may have already covered what i said, and i may not have said it as eloquently as i've heard it said in the past, but that's what i think.

 

Bouty:
Very nicely written. I think, though, that it proposes a beginning of time, not a creation of time, which in the strictest sense are two different things. However, the cause of the singularity that began it all in the first place is still a mystery. The beginning of any sort of matter/electron/whatever is a mystery, too. Not proof that there is a God, but it's food for thought.

DS:
It's tough for me alone to respond to our increasingly lengthening posts. While I enjoy debating with you, my wife is beginning to feel ignored. I will say this, though:

Whatever your beliefs are, you are entitled to them. Not just by the United States government, but by God himself, who gave you the freedom to choose. (That's what I believe ) What you have said in these last few posts are for the most part very true, and a few of the things you have said are striking and truly undebatable, because I cannot fully comprehend all the complexities of God and his plan. What I have said in the past has been summed up pretty nicely by Athyra up there.

What happens when people who do not accept Jesus when they die? I don't know, and frankly, I really can't worry about it. Whether they choose to believe it or not, those people have chosen their path, and that's that. I certainly don't wish any sort of harm to anyone, and if that's what they want, maybe they will simply suffer spiritual death. But I have to follow my mind and my heart.

DS, you are an intelligent and nice kid. You have been patient and polite, qualities that, as Athyra pointed out, are rare in conversations like this. I hope that I have returned the courtesy, although I think a few times I let my frustration show. If that's true, I apologize now.

This is a tough conversation to have online. I do my best debating face-to-face, because I have a hard time putting my thoughts 'on paper' as it were. I hope that I have been fair to you, and to the religion I have done my best to open and pick apart with you. I sometimes, especially in this day and age, feel like I have to defend my religion, as this is a time where in many places it can be 'unpopular' for lack of a better word, to call yourself a Christian. Don't take that to mean that I think you were attacking me or Christianity, because I know you weren't. Emotions are going to get caught up in this no matter what, especially since religion is %70 emotion anyway.

I won't lie that I hope you do accept Christianity someday. It's a wonderful religion for the most part, and you will often feel like you have found something that used to be missing if you're anything like me. Don't let the extremists who recieve all the press make you think less of us, because many of us still watch Seinfeld and sit on the toilet reading Stephen King and enjoy tricking our dogs into thinking we have treats in our left hand when it's really in the right. I personally still curse (albeit I try very hard not to use the Lord's name in vain) and enjoy violent movies and as a member of the US Military will kill if I am forced to for my country.

That's me.

Anyway, I have said enough, and if someone wants to take over for me, feel free. I think DS has enough fuel to go for another two weeks. I have been working a lot lately (for obvious reasons, I guess) and am very tired.

One last thing. We're all friends here, no matter how loosely. We all are SW geeks, and people probably make fun of all of us when we listen to the SW soundtrack at work (I'm not the only one, am I???) Whether your a Christian, an atheist, a muslim, a catholic, a mormon, the list goes on...we all have a bond, no matter how small. And we're all humans. That says more than anything else. So if I see you in another forum where you are debating whether or not Leia is a hottie in that metal bikini or not, I will be there to back you up, no matter how different our views are on this particular topic.
As for tonight, I bid you adieu. Here in Iceland it's coming on 7pm, and my wife beckons me to leave the computer or become sterile.

Good night, and

 

By the way, Leia is most definitely a hottie in that metal bikini.

 

tisk tisk, pete, i am sure your wife will not like that last comment <g>.
i cannot be posting as much on the weekdays because i need to concentrate on my schoolwork if i am to get into a good high school. i will post as much as possible on the weekends, however it might be difficult because my parents dont like me talking with people online, so i have to do a considerable of rule bending on the weekends in order to post without getting caught. nothing will stop me from coming though, i love it here!!!!
(is it just me or am i the only onje who hates being called a geek????)

 

Bouty: I hate being called a geek too (I am the same age as you, I'm onto High School next year), though I haven't been called that in a while. All the kids now just accept that I'm nuts and know there's no point in geek name calling.

I was wondering how this became a religous debate, but since it is, I have a few questions.

As an Athiest, I am asking these out of a purely curious nature, I am not mocking your religion.
About abortion: as far as I understood (I sort of skimmed some of the longer posts), most of you beleive the fetuses will go to heaven. If so, will they stay at the intelligence and emotional level as when they died (meaning about 0 for feteses)? If so, it would seem to be identical whether they went to heaven or hell, as they would not know or feel anything either way.
Also, from what I understand about most religions, I would not be on the fast-track to heaven. I have been taught about religion, and know a fair amount about the histories of several main religions, but I just can not believe any of the religious "facts", which can not be proven scientifically, and are all given on word of mouth (people saying they "felt God", etc.). I'm not sure how I could beleive in God, even if I went to a Heaven. Also, I don't see how heaven could be very fun, just standing around in the clouds all day, chating with other angels. Are there any books up there?

Again, I am not making fun of or mocking any religion, and I am not trying to get people angry.

 

lol. i really do think about those too. butheaven is not for us to know about. i have no idea what heaven is like, geeze i hope they have books...star wars boos, too.

 

Oh @#!$ing @#!$ #%&£!!!

I spent twenty minutes typing out a long conclusion and message of reply and then lost it when my computer froze up.

Grrrhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!

Apologies, I have no more time tonight to reply and it will have to wait until tomorrow. My post would probably be sour anyway if I were to rewrite it now considering the effect this has had on my mood.

Again, sorry for what will be a 3-day delay.

 

Oh @#!$ing @#!$ #%&£!!!

I spent twenty minutes typing out a long conclusion and message of reply and then lost it when my computer froze up.

Grrrhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!

Apologies, I have no more time tonight to reply and it will have to wait until tomorrow. My post would probably be sour anyway if I were to rewrite it now considering the effect this has had on my mood.

Again, sorry for what will be a 3-day delay.