Here you go optimist
Not sure my motivation...my instinctive need to stick up for the underdog...my secret desire to be one day honoured rightfully with the role of Forum moderator (expecting a call any day)...
But anyway I couldn't help but read your troubles on another thread...unfortunately I found myself siding with everyone's posts...other than your own...except for the part where you were told you can't post here!
So I put my low IQ mind to coming up with a solution that suits all...and here it is...a safe place if you like
You can post anything you like about your beliefs...and no one has to read it unless they want! Easy peasy...
maybe you could even get Jesus, fat Buddha, Mohammed, and friends to converse in adult conversation here
Solving the world problems, one at a time...call it taking a shovel as a way of moving that mountain
All the best...brother
PS...I actually was born again once, but I grew up, and grew a brain of my own...and realised it was all a load of shit!
Brutus just read your latest, wishing you all the best, peace
bonza...."you want me to prove that god is not real because you cant prove that he is?
brutus - have a think about how silly that logic is. apply to it all the crazy ideas out there that you don't' believe in."
so you cannot answer the question ," what proof do you have that God does not exist?" I am really interested what you have based your opinion on?
yeah I read that link , and one mans opinion vs 100's of others......read a lot of critiques then read the book and watched the movie........couple that with a lot of other books written by scholars.....coupled with personal supernatural experiences it's not a very long jump to believing in God/and Jesus....
so what do you believe in?
You are making a claim Brutus. The burden of proof is on you. That’s how it works. otherwise you can make up any crazy story, claim its true because someone can not prove it’s not. get it?
I ‘believe’ in evidence based knowledge.
All the best.
bonza , in your world the burden of proof is on me...if you care to read, all my posts, I have personal super natural experiences , have spent years reading ,watching and living a Christian life because for me , a world without hope is a secular one , where people believe in.......well what do you believe in.....No God?
Evidence for the existence of God (in a theist sense) comes in the form of a handful of philosophical arguments (which are involved in ongoing research, debate and refinement) e.g.
-Kalam cosmological argument
- Argument from fine-tuning
- Argument from contingency
- Argument from the existence of objective moral values and duties
Few others too.
To save an essay, if you're really interested have a go at looking into the above. William Lane Craig is one philosopher who handles each in depth. Alvin Plantinga another.
Whilst I don't find any one of them compelling, I find all logically watertight and plausible, so they build a pretty strong case cumulatively in my opinion. YMMV.
Evidence for Christian particularism comes from looking at the historical events surrounding the end of Jesus life (that he died from being crucified by Romans, that he was buried in a tomb under Roman guard, that the tomb was later found empty by a group of his female followers, that large numbers of people came to sincerely believe that they had physically, bodily encountered him after all this, etc), and finding the resurrection to be the best of the competing hypotheses put forward to explain those events.
I've gone through a lot of this in more detail on the earlier pages of this forum if you are interested.
thanks pops. actually i find the whole philosophical argument to be full of holes and far from watertight. Dawkins in his book the greatest show on earth dismantles this ruthlessly. as have many others including HItchens.
as far as the Resurrection myth to claim a empty tomb equals a re-risen man is laughable. but is is a good story. which is probably why the Christians re-hashed and re-packaged it from multiple other god stories told over the millennia prior.
I reckon everything has a soul and when you die your soul is transferred to a new vehicle be it human , animal, tree or even a drop of water .
I’m not sure on the specifics and I’m not too fussed on finding out. I just intuit that this is how the universe works . I feel this viscerally when I’m given an undistracted opportunity to take in any natural environment or when I’m sharing a moment with another being . Makes me happy so that’ll do me.
I think you misunderstood what I mean by logically watertight.
Basically, that *if* the premises of the argument are correct, then the conclusion logically follows. Not my place to judge for anyone else the truth of the various premises.
Dawkins is a very, very good biologist, but not a great philosopher. I've seen him debate Craig a few times and it was a little embarrassing tbh - he simply refused to engage with Craig's arguments and went for ad hominems. From what I can tell he's not really taken very seriously any more. Kraus similar (I organised a debate between Lawrence Kraus and Craig back when I was outreach exec for the usyd physics society).
Hitchens I have more time for - he's raised some interesting objections in the past (which is great because it makes people re-think and refine their arguments).
and Craig is obviously an outstanding debater and philosopher and tears to shreds many atheists.. nevertheless I don't buy it. i subscribe to the evolutionary biology theory because its based on evidence. the scientific method is the best we have in determining fact. In my view Craig uses a non-falsifiable argument as his centre piece for the existence of god. in my opinion using that does not stack up as evidence.
What do you see as his centre piece? And can you elaborate on why you see it as non falsifiable?
Personally , I subscribe to Buddhism , but I'm only a student. Questioning everything is part of that deal. Why don't I believe in God and where's my proof? It just doesn't click with me logically or scientifically . Proof? well the definition of proof seems highly subjective when discussing religious matters so that's a hard one to answer.. Though most of the time I find it's religious people who are trying to convince/convert/save non believers , and not the other way round. I don't ask anyone to question their faith , that is up to them to do. I live by my own set of moral rules and that's that.
"Live a good life. If there are Gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been , but will welcome you based on the virtues you live by.
If there are Gods ,but unjust , you should not want to worship them.
If there are no Gods , then you will be gone , but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones ." Marcus Aurelius
Whatever floats your boat
well said tubeshooter
"We can rebuild him; we have the technology," Six Million Man on 9Go, there's my religion on a lazy Monday arvo after a morning surf
How Iceland recreated a Viking-age religion:
Ásatrú, the old Norse Paganism is the fastest growing and largest non-Christian religion in Iceland
Iceland is building its first Nordic paganist temple in 1000 years
Nice that the old indigenous religion of my ancestors gets a re-boot. And it's been suppressed for not 200 years, but 1200: the response was to hide it in plain sight. And if you look closely at those northern lights, you might just be able to see Woden/Odin riding his great steed Sleipnir in the sky...er. sorry, Santa and his reindeer and sleigh haha
Vikings! I have belatedly started watching the Netflix series, which is pretty good. Couple of really good Australian actors in it too.
Of course, it's not a documentary but broadly speaking it's interesting how the outcome of each battle was seemingly 'decided by the gods' (albeit different gods across the different religions).
The Marcus Aurelius quote above was great too.
Most fascinating for me in recent years have been all the correlations between different cultures for a 'Day of the Dead' or 'All Hallow's Eve'. Interpretations of events like Ragnarok can be taken not to be in the future but a record of the past... how far back can we see? The stories are everywhere and point to total cataclysm preceded by great comets in the sky ("dragons", "gods"). Mix that in with huge sea level rise recorded in oral traditions and confirmed by science, mass alluvial deposition and erosion on landscapes and impact crater fields under water and ice now...
vj any Dupuytren's contracture in the family?
Only when I do a full roundhouse cutback (true!)
known DNA link back to the vikings (true)
They tended to seed red hair into Scotland & Ireland as a more obvious link
Guy, I wonder why you ask. Is it more common in Nordic ancestry?
A mate is a GP, he lives up in Ballina and we get together with a few old school buddies once a year for a surf and golf long weekend. A few years ago I felt a tweak in my tendon on my ring finger while doing weights. Didn't think about it much but it has developed a small lump there. I asked my mate about it and he instantly said Dupuytrens contracture, which I looked up.
It hasn't progressed at all and this is years down the track, but the lump is still there. I suspect it was just a small tendon tear that has built up, but it's not worth getting diagnosed. No pain, and no progression in terms of DC.
As for Nordic mythology, always was attracted to it since watching Thor cartoons on TV as a very young child. Not like animated movies, more like narrated comic books. Thor and Thor's hammer have always resonated, as you can imagine. Cue Blowin for Thor joke here.
OK, Guy already responded while I was typing. Interesting. My ancestry is largely Irish with a bit of germanic perhaps, although my brother has done the research but hasn't finished his history tome yet, but he suspects that is a little bit bullshit.
I had quite reddy/brown hair as a child that got darker as I got into my teens, then finally dark brown (some have said black, but caucasians don't really have black hair other than from greek ancestry, IIRC).
Now my hair is mostly grey, so that's all moot, bu there might be some nordic ancestry in there, especially as the Irish were such a melting pot in terms of ancestry.
Hey Batfink, I found a Nordic book of children's tales while still at uni, and would read these to our young son. My partner and I found we fell in love with the stories.
The Red hair in our family is Scots I think (and the Vikings thought the Scots 'southlanders'), and tends to skip a generation, but crops up in beards, etc, and occasionally the full red hair. Mine's darkened as I age but if I surf heaps it goes a lighter gold. It's interesting that red hair can occur in all ethnic groups in very, very small numbers in some, although the highest % is in people from Scotland, at about 15%. Very rare minority worldwide.
Generally underneath your ring finger/s??
And I thought it was a deformity from lots of manual labour!
The things you learn on Swellnet.
My ancestors Irish on my fathers side . I have Dupuytrens Çontracture in both hands -principally little fingers. Hard cords form in hand pulling fingers into the contracted position. Noticed it first when about 50 yrs. Snapped one (cord) several years back when doing pop up. . Immediate pain and bruising but thought that had fixed it. Alas not, it came back. Then tried the non surgical injection , cord softening and manipulation to straighten method of remediation. Ghastly experience, didn't really work. and I think they may have take this off the Ok to do list. Got full op on left hand 18 months ago . Good result , but not much fun. You wont be able to surf for 6 weeks or so after. If you have it it gets worse over time . Planning other hand next year.
I've had the non surgical procedure to my right hand for DC, as H2O says not pleasant. Its coming back slowly. DC stiffens the cords in the palm of your hand pulling the fingers back, haven't heard it being connected to issues in the fingers. It is known to be widespread across the UK about as widespread as the viking's pillaging tours .... as confirmed by my doctors.
Aussie Athiests with a sense of Humour
Yes Udo a highly intelligent group who don't know the difference between Lessen and a Lesson....Let that be a lesson to you.
I'll take atheism over spelling and grammar every day of the weak.
Atheism is all fun and games till you hit your mid 50s. By their 60s, they kinda go quiet.
Probably get pretty tired of being right by then I guess.
Optimist, we have crossed swords over the destructive influence christian missioners have had on indigenous cultures the world over. ABC TV is currently running a series titled The Pacific: In the Wake of Captain Cook with Sam Neill. Worthy viewing on how cultures that had prospered for 1,000s of years were negatively influenced by Cook and the explorers and missionaries that followed ..... highly recommended (watch on iview).
"Probably get pretty tired of being right by then I guess".... Lol that's what theists say.
But nah, nothing like ones own impending doom to shut one up and embrace agnosticism. Atheists piss me off as much as god heads. They even have churches now, The irony. Charles Darwin said the only logical choice is to be agnostic. Because no one truly knows. Saying "I don't know" is the only logical thing to say.
Yes we do. It’s called evidence.
Darwin had a theory he “didn’t really know” on evolution over 150 years ago.
We now know it’s a fact.
No facts, no evidence...everything is still as it was, there are only micro evolutionary changes and adaptions within the same species that have always been here.
Even most science now admits they see design and maths in everything....so who is the designer? I was watching some ants the other day and wondered if some didn't believe in humans.
and Guy, We follow Jesus , not captain cook...or some stuffy old missionaries who lacked respect for lifestyle.....I myself follow an early pacific lifestyle..Ha.....Fishing, cultivate fruit, and veg and wave riding, hate materialism and with respect for Jesus who taught me things like not to spear the neighbours if I was angry with them (even though sometimes Id like to) or to bury my babies alive in the sand if they had a birthmark etc etc. Everyone has something to learn from everyone, its the good things and the wise things and the things that improve life we all naturally embrace from each other but with respect to the people and the planet designed for us to live on ....now that is evolution.....Right now, everyones spending gazillions to go to mars, a place we can never live, instead of improving the lives and the environment of the people that live here on our home planet. There is no black or white or red or yellow, there is only us and we should embrace the best from everyone and discard the rest that isnt going to take us forward into a clean green world where we learn from our past and help each other and show respect to God who made us and our home.
No facts, no evidence?
God, (the bloke) made everything. Possibly because he was bored.
He also made two humans and told them not to eat from the tree.
They ate from the tree.
He could not forgive them. He then had to punish them and all their offspring going forward with eternal damnation.
Perhaps he got bored with that or started to feel bad about it, so he had sex (or did not have sex) with a virgin who remained a virgin and she gave birth to his son, (a proper son, unlike a non-virginal son).
Man then proceeded to persecute this son and ultimately crucify him and now God (the bloke) can forgive us all and we can all go to heaven. All we have to do is believe in the story, man. Oh, and not have sex outside of marriage or masturbate. Simple.
Pass me another mushroom.
Afterlife / heaven - the big carrot for all those hymns, bible study or maybe from the easy option of saying one minute before you die - "I believe". What is there? Is it some weird recreation of earthly stuff or something more "Godly" and mysterious?
Can you imagine a God would have the following waiting for you.....
- good surf? - I doubt it
- sex? - I doubt it
- good food? - I doubt it
- work (fulfilling types)? - I doubt it
- books? - I doubt it
- games? - I doubt it
- swellnet? - maybe
- sport? - I doubt it
- all my favourite dogs? - I doubt it
- movies and TV? - I doubt it
- viewing platforms to (enviously) watch those on earth do all of the above? - maybe
- lots and lots and lots (billions) of (very bored) souls milling about for eternity talking about "remember when"? - supposedly
If it was a holiday destination, would you book a trip for say 5 years? What about 100 years? What about 1000?
My elderly relative finally made it there the other week (in his belief system). A hugely important destination in his mind (that funnily he avoided as long as he possibly could by every medical intervention possible despite terrible health issues). But his whole concept was about crossing the finishing line - meeting (or queueing to meet) Jesus - there seemed very little thought about what is there and the next billion years.
Worth some thought. Especially as it is the hugely important reward dangled in front of the flock.
An ex JW recently outlined in an article that one of her biggest fears as a teenager was the promise of eternal life living with other JWs doing not much at all.
Be careful what you wish for.
classic stuff, fantasy, fiction, delusion, all part of life so valid. remember life is eternal so the energy( beliefs, awareness) you die with is the energy blueprint you take forward into the next chapter of your never ending story. yep, you leave this body behind, just like an old pair of thongs with holes in them) and re-create your new form. evidence, facts?
ha, this is the one big surprise that you don't get to fully contemplate until it happens. you know how they talk about being in the now, being fully present, well death=birth and you will be fully present, so embrace it, it will be a fully stoked experience,
i been there done that, got the bliss out of it, so don't be fearful, pull in and get covered up holy.
Cool story. Prove it.
frog, it's an honour that - despite you thinking God won't have surf, sex, good food, books, games, movies, sport or TV waiting in the afterlife - you're mildy confident he has recreated Swellnet.
Though, I'm unsure whether our database will allow user to reset their passwords, if they reside in Arcadia, Utopia, Elysian, Shangri-La or Zion. May need to source a mititary-grade VPN.
Absolutely there is evidence of what your life will be like after you die.
It’ll be exactly the same as it was for you before you were born.
Sheesh, life on this world is actually pretty fucking simple, and I’m getting tired of pointing out the obvious to all you nitwits
Next you’ll be telling me coal is our friend and Delta Goodrum has talent
Thanks Udo... bloody funny stuff on that Aussie Atheists link!
Sorry optimist not buying, when you say lifestyle you are equally displaying all the cultural and spiritual arrogance of those missionaries that destroyed the ancient cultural belief systems.
Why not just watch that program on Cook .....
Bonza writes "Yes we do. It’s called evidence."
Ummm I was quoting Darwins thoughts on life after death, not evolution. thgere is NO evidence on life after death, just as there is no evidence on death being the ultimate end. Therefore he LOGICALLY became an agnostic in a very dangerous time to go gainst the church
Charles Darwin - ""In my most extreme fluctuations I have never been an atheist in the sense of denying the existence of a God.— I think that generally, and more and more so as I grow older but not always, that an agnostic would be the most correct description of my state of mind."
There’s plenty of evidence that death is the ultimate end. Walk outside put your hand in the dirt. Bingo.
There’s no evidence that your soul or spirit or whatever you want to call it continues on in any other form .. Saying “I don’t know” isn’t logical at all. Because actually we do know.. nothing no one has ever presented to be an afterlife has even come close to been proven. Ever. Fact.
My point about Darwin was he also had doubts about his theory on evolution at the time he submitted for peer review. Certainly his scientific critics did. just like he may have had doubts on the existence of god. But that was 150 years ago. His theory has been put through the ringer and is considered in the real world as fact. Given what we know now do you reckon Darwin would be agnostic today?
I doubt it.
Seeing as we are quoting Darwin...
What did Charles Darwin say about the human eye?
Charles Darwin considered the evolution of the human eye one of the toughest problems his theory had to explain. In “On the Origin of Species,” he wrote that the idea that natural selection could produce such an intricate organ “seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree.”
Here's the full text....
To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.”1