Evolution or Creation?

[Archonsod]

Um, how we're going to feel pain and thirst when our nerve endings no longer exist?

 

[Merentha]

Um, how we're going to feel pain and thirst when our nerve endings no longer exist?

Shhhh.  Monist logic applied to a dualist concept causes fundamental flaws. 

TIK:  The word you are looking for is agnostic.  Agonists are actually the opposite of antagonists, at least in a pharmacological view.  I don't know if the word can be applied in other contexts, but seeing as how antagonist can be, I would assume so. 

 

[Dryvus]

Um, how we're going to feel pain and thirst when our nerve endings no longer exist?

Soul Pain.

 

[Merentha]

Which means the food in hell will taste a lot like cajun chicken. 

 

[okiN]

Will they be serving Luthers? Not necessarily named after mr Vandross in this case.

 

[Pixel]

I don't argue out of hate, I merely argue out of concern.

Imagine if you woke up on a world where everyone believed in Santa.
There are wars being fought over Santa, and in some places you will be arrested if you make a joke about Rudolph.
If you found yourself in that place, surely you'd want to try and convince some people that Santa didn't actually exist, and that all the wars were pointless and that the mince-pie and brandy industry is merely making a few people very rich off the back of other's beliefs.

Not necessarily. I was putting it at very basic and 'logical' terms that someone who was not saved could understand. Of course I believe know it will all my heart soul and mind, but that's when people like you (not you par say, but anti godders in general) start getting up-around-the-ears, when Christians start babbling about being saved by this mysterious 'grace' and all that. I am perfectly aware of the fact that you cannot understand it, even if you wanted to.

I have had religious experiences, so I do understand. The difference is that I didn't attribute them to God, but to my brain.
And then it comes back to belief again. If I do not have the capacity to believe, then I am pre-determined to go to hell if I use my common sense and  don't blindly follow others.
This seems a little unfair, I must admit. 

The only religous experience i could say is when i prayed fior the first time and it was answered, though it was most likely just coincidence.


And I do quite hastily agree that the whole thing about "so what, they have a god and we have monkeys..." thing. But if that was a somthing, then this thread would have no point will it?
There would be no crusades or somthing to make into video games, and stuff like that.

But still, denying one person's religoin is a great problem to him or her. But maybe in the next life you can believe in somthing different and excel in somthing else.

 

[scaddenp]

I think the poll was munched idea from start. If you arent a breed of fundamentalist Christian, then creationist isnt really an option. The binding of "evolutionist" ( I hate that
word - is a scientist going to call themselves an evolutionist??) to other faith positions is pretty imperfect as well. Dont see option for Christian who does believe in theistic
evolution for a start.

 

[Yoshiboy]

I think that there are only 6 "Agnostic or atheist and does NOT believe in evolution" really gives away this poll 

 

[macethump]

I think the poll was munched idea from start. If you arent a breed of fundamentalist Christian, then creationist isnt really an option. The binding of "evolutionist" ( I hate that
word - is a scientist going to call themselves an evolutionist??) to other faith positions is pretty imperfect as well. Dont see option for Christian who does believe in theistic
evolution for a start.

Well, the Theistic evolution choice is a close as we're going to get. 

Those of a logical bent and who deny the existance of a spiritual realm should not be surprised if they cannot discern spiritual things.  They might be wise to avoid immersing themselves in a spiritual discussion the same way I would be well-advised to avoid discussions on computer programming or calculus or Hinduism, subjects about which I know nothing.  I would expect to participate as a learner, asking for clarifications and reasoning.  Experts in those subjects were not born with expertise, but learned from others, either directly from personal encounters or through reading with an open mind.  Those who have not studied or personally encountered spiritual matters might wish to avoid arguing from ignorance.  Lack of evidende is not evidence of lack.  The universe does not owe them a revelation or explanation.  But, as an open forum of thinking people (mostly), well-reasoned and respectfully presented opinions are always welcome.  "Iron sharpens iron."

 

[scaddenp]

I think that there are only 6 "Agnostic or atheist and does NOT believe in evolution" really gives away this poll 

Well I guess that gives lie to proposition that evolution and creationism form a dichotomy.

 

[The_Invincible_Knight]

TIK:  The word you are looking for is agnostic.  Agonists are actually the opposite of antagonists, at least in a pharmacological view.  I don't know if the word can be applied in other contexts, but seeing as how antagonist can be, I would assume so.  

Yes, I got the word wrong (I got two letters the wrong way around), but I think that the definition (I gave) should have made it blatent that I was referring to the agnostic people of the world. Here are several of the definitions of agnostic:

An Agnostic [1] [noun] [OW] embraces a worldview in which the existence of deity is unknown or unknowable. Derives from the Greek agnostos, a = without, gnostos = known or knowledge. ...

One who holds the theory that God is unknown or unknowable

Someone who claims that they do not know or are unable to know whether God exists.

a person who claims that they cannot have true knowledge about the existence of God (but does not deny that God might exist)

Agnosticism (from the Greek a, meaning "without", and Gnosticism or gnosis, meaning knowledge) means unknowable, and is the philosophical view that the truth value of certain claims—particularly theological claims regarding metaphysics, afterlife or the existence of God, god(s), or deities ...

A word first used by Professor Huxley, to indicate one who believes nothing which cannot be demonstrated by the senses.

I think that the last one sounds a bit more like athiesm. I could say more, but I'm sure that'd I'd offend a fair few athiests.

Some believe that the fires are symbolic of cleansing. Not necessarily literal flames. That's the thing with the Bible; it requires many years of study and thought on its true meanings to truly understand it. Of course that's if you want to understand. Otherwise you can stay ignorant of the teachings of the Bible.

Your choice, but I'll be damned (yes, that was intended as a pun) if I won't at least try to understand the wisdom in those many books.

 

[Redcoat-Mic]

Some believe that the fires are symbolic of cleansing. Not necessarily literal flames. That's the thing with the Bible; it requires many years of study and thought on its true meanings to truly understand it. Of course that's if you want to understand. Otherwise you can stay ignorant of the teachings of the Bible.

Question, why on earth would God intend a book designed to teach people the right way to live undecipherable? Surely the more people that understand it, the better.
To me, that just means years of trying to make contradictions fit, like hammering an incorrect jigsaw piece into place and saying it only makes sense if you truly put effort into it.

 

[The_Invincible_Knight]

Well if I were the Almighty I wouln't want humans to know everything; with knowledge comes power and some people are corrupted by that power or by fear of losing it.

Corruption is one of the things humanity suffers from. One of the worst things, too.

He does not lust, lie, rape, envy or become greedy. He is not corrupt, either. You can't corrupt some people. He punishes sin, but rewards loyalty. He gives all humans a chance. Whether or not they'll take it is up to them. Though He knows everything that they will do He still gives them the chance to lead a good life and follow him.

If Christians are right then all people have a chance to live eternally. All people, regardless of race, gender, age or intelligence.

If athiests are right then we are doomed to die in a relatively short amount of time. Sure you can slow death, but I wager that humans will never be able to escape death. Whether by the proverbial sword or by the scythe of death they will die.

I'd rather have a belief in something than believe that we're all already dead.

 

[Ingolifs]

Um, how we're going to feel pain and thirst when our nerve endings no longer exist?

Of course, it won't actually be us that will burn in hell.

Your mind, everything you experience, your personality, your concept of pain, all your thoughts, emotions, reactions, senses, hopes and dreams are all generated by your brain. That physical mass of stuff inside your head. We know this, because injuries to various specific parts of the brain can profoundly alter someone's personality, outlook on the world, and the way they function. There is even a specific part of the brain, that when stimulated, produces emotions that people describe as 'religious'. We've been through this before.

Ok, so we know that the brain is completely responsible for a person's thoughts, feelings and personality. If there is a soul, your soul does not resemble you as a person.

So what happens when you die? First off, death is usually defined as death of the brain, either through severe damage to the brain itself or through lack of oxygen to the brain. The brain needs oxygen to function, and becomes irreversibly damaged when starved of oxygen for too long. The brain goes, you go with it, since your consciousness is fundamentally connected to your brain.

Now, after that? There are many different things that can happen to your soul or whatever. Your soul could be transported to a place designed to torture it (although it isn't clear how you would torture a soul, given that you don't even know if it feels pain in the same way you feel pain). Or perhaps a copy of your body is made and transported to a place designed to torture that body.

But this is the thing, this soul or copy is not you. In the copy's case, it may espouse the same ideas and have the same experiences as you, but it's not you, it's a copy. Just as how cloning you now wouldn't grant you consciousness over your cloned body, copying you after you die won't grant you consciousness over your copy.

Here we come to the crux of the matter.
Even if there is an afterlife, You will cease to exist when you die.
This works both ways, for both heaven and hell. You won't be going to either.

The totality of your own experience is the squishy thing in your head. Once that goes, it's curtains.

Well if I were the Almighty I wouln't want humans to know everything; with knowledge comes power and some people are corrupted by that power or by fear of losing it.

If I were the almighty, i'd be cogent.

 

[Redcoat-Mic]

I'd rather have a belief in something than believe that we're all already dead.

And this ladies and gentlemen, is the main reason behind religion. You'd rather believe in it because it's uncomfortable. No one wants to die but it's going to happen, better to face facts.

 

[SharpFish]

The worms crawl in and the worms crawl out
The ones that crawl in are lean and thin
The ones that crawl out are fat and stout
Your eyes fall in and your teeth fall out
Your brains come tumbling down your snout
Be merry my friends
Be merry

- The Pogues, Worms

 

[Llew2]

Here we come to the crux of the matter.
Even if there is an afterlife, You will cease to exist when you die.
This works both ways, for both heaven and hell. You won't be going to either.

You sound like you are trying very hard to convince yourself of this. I really hope you can reason yourself right out of existence when you die, because it might be a little awkward if you didn't. 

 

[Redcoat-Mic]

Here we come to the crux of the matter.
Even if there is an afterlife, You will cease to exist when you die.
This works both ways, for both heaven and hell. You won't be going to either.

You sound like you are trying very hard to convince yourself of this. I really hope you can reason yourself right out of existence when you die, because it might be a little awkward if you didn't. 

It doesn't sound like he's trying to convince himself at all... 
Why would it be awkward anyway? I can't see any problems. Whoops, I was wrong but oh well I lived a good life, let me in you bearded bastard.

 

[Ingolifs]

You sound like you are trying very hard to convince yourself of this.

incorrect.

I'm right, and you know it.

But seriously, if you disagree, don't reply with some vague threat about going to hell. Instead, try to actually find some flaw in my reasoning.

 

[Llew2]

I'm right, and you know it.

Of course. What can I say?

But seriously, if you disagree, don't reply with some vague threat about going to hell. Instead, try to actually find some flaw in my reasoning.

My reasoning? Simple: You have no idea what a Soul is. You have no idea what rules bind a soul. You have no idea what REALLY happens when you die. You can logic 'till you're blue in the face, but if you don't know the basics of what soul really is or isn't, all your logic is worthless. At least I have a book that says.