Creationism.

The place to hang out and talk about totally anything general.
strongdl
level1
level1
Posts: 64
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 8:20 pm
Location: Midwest, US

Postby strongdl » Fri Feb 27, 2009 7:16 pm

Saying that religion was 'invented' implies that there was a conspiracy. For some religions that may be true. How do you know that there isn't really a God? And if so, why create people without desiring some involvement in their life? Just because people have adopted and corrupted the original, so they could live the way they wanted (bad behavior and what not), and still feel good about being religious, it doesn't mean that there isn't really an authentic religion, one that does not condone bad behavior. One that might actually deliver on the promises it makes.
TomCat39
level3
level3
Posts: 303
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 11:52 pm

Re: Creationism.

Postby TomCat39 » Fri Feb 27, 2009 7:26 pm

NeatNit wrote:
TomCat39 wrote:
NeatNit wrote:If I was asked to suggest one thing that would make this world a better place then it would undoubtedly be one of these two options:
  1. Make every single human on earth atheist.
  2. Get me a supercomputer and every non-EA PC game out until now, plus DNF.


The first suggestion wouldn't aid anything. Let alone everything evil and bad that has already been pointed out about the atheistic folk in history. It would also cause a lot of people of faith with problems to revert to their problems. Some people need to believe in something bigger then themselves to over come their vices. For some, it helps and actually makes them better people. Go figure.
I wish that was true.

I have nothing against religion - just what it causes. See, it was invented to make people be better people. It claims to give people better lives, and long ones, as long as they are not greedy, selfish or violent. However, it is completely broken at one point - people begin to think that as long as they're praying to their god and remain faithful to him, go to church/whatever and basically do the non-good-person parts of religion, they are allowed to be bad people and violent and what not. The ones who do choose to follow the good person way, end up with this:

Image

*I am in no way claiming that this letter to Santa is real, but it does represent what may happen if children, or even adults, begin to notice that being good people doesn't reward them as much as they expected.


I'd say you don't have a lot of experience with the darker side of humanity on a personal level. I say this because you disagree that religion has helps some individuals be better people for themselves and others around them.

I know ex drug addicts, ex gang bangers and other violent people that "found jesus" and they are now productive members of society. Clean, sober and working normal jobs, now have families of their own.

you may try and say it's any number of things other than religion but I know without a doubt if it had not been for them giving themselves to religion, they would either be dead, in prison or other institutional situations.

I'm also not saying it helps all people.

Also your thoughts on being good are irrational. What you found is someone who did good with an alterior motive. So it was a forced good, not just living good. People who do good don't get upset when it's not rewarded by others unless they are only doing it for some reward. People who live to be good get rewarded by the feeling they get from doing the good deeds. If you ever meet general all around good people, they don't do it for anyone else, they do it for themselves.

Your life experiences seem to be lacking. But then again, you are probably still pretty young so haven't the time pass to gain the experiences, no fault of yours.
"Now, stop being a douche to the newbie, and run along."

xander
User avatar
NeatNit
level5
level5
Posts: 2929
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 2:41 pm
Location: Israel
Contact:

Re: Creationism.

Postby NeatNit » Fri Feb 27, 2009 7:50 pm

TomCat39 wrote:Your life experiences seem to be lacking. But then again, you are probably still pretty young so haven't the time pass to gain the experiences, no fault of yours.
Well yes... But I can safely say that the only real good person I have met in my life is... Me.

(not including family - that is very often a fake good)
User avatar
xander
level5
level5
Posts: 16869
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Highland, CA, USA
Contact:

Re: Creationism.

Postby xander » Fri Feb 27, 2009 10:17 pm

NeatNit wrote:I don't see how this is different from what I said. Perhaps I suck at expression (which I admittedly am), or maybe you didn't read right, I dunno. And how would you know about chimpanzees? You don't speak their lan-- Nevermind.

Your claim is that religion was invented to make people [behave] better. I claim that religion has nothing to do with making people behave better. Rather, the cultural rules that dictate how people "ought" to behave are generally incorporated into religion. As to the chimpanzees, by observing how they behave, we can infer things about moral reasoning. And many chimpanzees have been taught to communicate in ways that people can understand, either by using picture boards or sign language (though Koko the gorilla is far more famous for her use of sign).

TomCat39 wrote:you may try and say it's any number of things other than religion but I know without a doubt if it had not been for them giving themselves to religion, they would either be dead, in prison or other institutional situations.

Please back up this assertion with some evidence. Right now, it looks like you are suffering from the fallacy of post hoc, ergo propter hoc, i.e. you are assuming that because one thing happened (these people found Jebus), it must have been the cause of a later occurrence (they sobered up). There are many treatment facilities in the US (and probably in the rest of the world) that do not rely upon religion, and are just as effective (for instance, this article seems to indicate that drug use/cessation is not significantly correlated with religious belief or church attendance, which is basically the opposite of your claim).

xander
User avatar
NeatNit
level5
level5
Posts: 2929
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 2:41 pm
Location: Israel
Contact:

Postby NeatNit » Fri Feb 27, 2009 11:05 pm

Ok, that's it, I'm not posting here again. I'm sick of serious discussions.



I, with my stupidity, started it and so now I say: Stop it. kthxbai
TomCat39
level3
level3
Posts: 303
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 11:52 pm

Re: Creationism.

Postby TomCat39 » Fri Feb 27, 2009 11:16 pm

xander wrote:Please back up this assertion with some evidence. Right now, it looks like you are suffering from the fallacy of post hoc, ergo propter hoc, i.e. you are assuming that because one thing happened (these people found Jebus), it must have been the cause of a later occurrence (they sobered up). There are many treatment facilities in the US (and probably in the rest of the world) that do not rely upon religion, and are just as effective (for instance, this article seems to indicate that drug use/cessation is not significantly correlated with religious belief or church attendance, which is basically the opposite of your claim).

xander


I can't offer you evidence of my personal experiences with my personal friends. It's not a study or a science project it's how our lives played out. A friend of mine was a gang banger, meth dealer and user. He was hardcore strung out on meth, he quit all the above at the same time he started going to church religiously (excuse the pun) and now is married, has kids and is an emphatic follower. I have another friend that also was a meth user who denied his own beliefs in christianity who didn't quit using until he went back and adopted his beliefs. Noenthing else changed AT the time. Things did change after though being they were off of drugs. Such as getting married, having kids, providing for themselves, their spouse etc. I can't prove anything. But it's rather coicidental that both people quit a VERY addictive drug (crystal meth) at the exact same time they started attending church and renewing their faith.

I also have met people that are emphatically religious that do horrid things and still abuse substances like alcohol or drugs. I tend not to know them long.

I am merely observing my life and noting the religion has helped some people to better their lives that I have seen first hand. But you people want to say it doesn't help anyone. That there are no exceptions. Which I just can't believe is true.

Also note, I'm not religious, nor attend church and find the concept very hard to accept. I feel Christianity is nothing but a 2000 year lie used to control the masses. Yet I still acknowledge that some people need to believe in something greater than themselves.

The 12 step program (the most commonly used and I think most successful recovery program) even has you "believe" in something greater than you (typically called "God") as part of the recovery program.

Our darkest times (the dark ages) is when the church had control of the world at large. I don't believe in church or any of the major religions with the exception of Budhism. I tend to think if anyone is close, it's Budhism.
"Now, stop being a douche to the newbie, and run along."



xander
Rkiver
level5
level5
Posts: 6405
Joined: Tue Oct 01, 2002 10:39 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: Creationism.

Postby Rkiver » Fri Feb 27, 2009 11:20 pm

TomCat39 wrote:Also note, I'm not religious, nor attend church and find the concept very hard to accept. I feel Christianity is nothing but a 2000 year lie used to control the masses. Yet I still acknowledge that some people need to believe in something greater than themselves.

The 12 step program (the most commonly used and I think most successful recovery program) even has you "believe" in something greater than you (typically called "God") as part of the recovery program.


12 Step isn't the most successful actually, Penn and Tellar did a rather nice show on it.
Uplink help: Read the FAQ
TomCat39
level3
level3
Posts: 303
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 11:52 pm

Re: Creationism.

Postby TomCat39 » Sat Feb 28, 2009 4:42 am

Rkiver wrote:12 Step isn't the most successful actually, Penn and Tellar did a rather nice show on it.


Good show, just watched it on youtube.

Explains why I didn't like or follow NA in my teen years.

Now I truly hope our world is finally maturing to not need a "higher power". I'm thinking my two friends who used religion to quit drugs aren't strong enough to believe in themselves. Or still follow the rest of the world and wants to shirk the responsibility. I don't know.

I guess they were part of the 5% :D
"Now, stop being a douche to the newbie, and run along."



xander
User avatar
xander
level5
level5
Posts: 16869
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Highland, CA, USA
Contact:

Re: Creationism.

Postby xander » Sat Feb 28, 2009 7:29 am

TomCat39 wrote:I can't offer you evidence of my personal experiences with my personal friends. It's not a study or a science project it's how our lives played out. A friend of mine was a gang banger, meth dealer and user. He was hardcore strung out on meth, he quit all the above at the same time he started going to church religiously (excuse the pun) and now is married, has kids and is an emphatic follower. I have another friend that also was a meth user who denied his own beliefs in christianity who didn't quit using until he went back and adopted his beliefs. Noenthing else changed AT the time. Things did change after though being they were off of drugs. Such as getting married, having kids, providing for themselves, their spouse etc. I can't prove anything. But it's rather coicidental that both people quit a VERY addictive drug (crystal meth) at the exact same time they started attending church and renewing their faith.

The plural of "anecdote" is "anecdotes," not "data."

xander
TomCat39
level3
level3
Posts: 303
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 11:52 pm

Re: Creationism.

Postby TomCat39 » Sat Feb 28, 2009 5:25 pm

xander wrote:
TomCat39 wrote:I can't offer you evidence of my personal experiences with my personal friends. It's not a study or a science project it's how our lives played out. A friend of mine was a gang banger, meth dealer and user. He was hardcore strung out on meth, he quit all the above at the same time he started going to church religiously (excuse the pun) and now is married, has kids and is an emphatic follower. I have another friend that also was a meth user who denied his own beliefs in christianity who didn't quit using until he went back and adopted his beliefs. Nonething else changed AT the time. Things did change after though being they were off of drugs. Such as getting married, having kids, providing for themselves, their spouse etc. I can't prove anything. But it's rather concidental that both people quit a VERY addictive drug (crystal meth) at the exact same time they started attending church and renewing their faith.

The plural of "anecdote" is "anecdotes," not "data."

xander


And what does this have to do with the price of rice in china?

That was my point, you wanted me to back up my belief with evidence like it was some study. When all I am purely going off of my own observations of my personal life aka the anecdote.

The one thing wrong with your outlook is you claim there to be only one precise method only, and that it works for everyone and everything every single time. This is just not correct. Every person is different and reacts differently to different stimuli. Different medications for different people. Etc.

Simply, it's not black and white only, there is also colors, and many greys in between.
"Now, stop being a douche to the newbie, and run along."



xander
User avatar
xander
level5
level5
Posts: 16869
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Highland, CA, USA
Contact:

Re: Creationism.

Postby xander » Sat Feb 28, 2009 7:21 pm

TomCat39 wrote:And what does this have to do with the price of rice in china?

That was my point, you wanted me to back up my belief with evidence like it was some study. When all I am purely going off of my own observations of my personal life aka the anecdote.

The one thing wrong with your outlook is you claim there to be only one precise method only, and that it works for everyone and everything every single time. This is just not correct. Every person is different and reacts differently to different stimuli. Different medications for different people. Etc.

Simply, it's not black and white only, there is also colors, and many greys in between.

You stated that, without a doubt, people that you know had been "saved" by finding religion. That is pretty black and white. You then pointed out that there was a correlation in their lives between religion and cleaning up. First, that is anecdotal, and does not actually convey any evidence. Second, correlation is not the same thing as causation. Perhaps there was some third cause that brought about both religion and their cleaning up. Perhaps it was their cleaning up that brought on their religion (rather than the other way around, which is your assertion). If you are making an empirical claim about the universe, which you did, then yes, there is basically only one way to support that claim, i.e. with verifiable, reproducible evidence.

xander
Rkiver
level5
level5
Posts: 6405
Joined: Tue Oct 01, 2002 10:39 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Postby Rkiver » Sat Feb 28, 2009 7:31 pm

Which of course there is none in that case, as shown by the aformentioned show.
Uplink help: Read the FAQ
TomCat39
level3
level3
Posts: 303
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 11:52 pm

Postby TomCat39 » Sun Mar 01, 2009 4:40 am

Yes, I don't doubt that they used religion to better there lives aka "saved" themselves. I know there wasn't another factor that influenced both.

In all reality, they decided to clean up their act, in doing so they "found" religion. And used religion to help them with their cause. But I guarantee you, you couldn't tell them they decided to clean up their act and then got involved with religion. If you ask them, "God" or "Jesus" saved them from their addictions etc etc.

Maybe I went about it wrong. I know addiction, and I know it can be quite a difficult task to overcome addiction. Quite often there is other drugs prescribed to overcome the addiction. Another option for some is to focus in on religion to overcome their addiction. So in that scenario, religion helps them better their lives. Which is basically all I said in the beginning, that religion does help some people. Granted the people decided to help themselves and then use the religion as a tool or aid in their cause. I understand all that. It doesn't change the factor that some people do find religion as a useful tool for themselves to overcome things that they can't seem to find the power to do themselves. I'm not saying it's a healthy way for anyone to change habits, but it does help some people. That's all I've tried to say. Yet you keep trying to say it helps none, or that's the impression I get from your arguments.
"Now, stop being a douche to the newbie, and run along."



xander
User avatar
shinygerbil
level5
level5
Posts: 4667
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 10:14 pm
Location: Out, finding my own food. Also, doing the shinyBonsai Manoeuvre(tm)
Contact:

Postby shinygerbil » Sun Mar 01, 2009 6:11 am

So, wait, we are pushing the burden of proof around in a matter involving religion/God? :roll:

Statistical data does not denote proof, in either direction. And that is all the data we will ever receive on such matters, disregarding personal opinions, and excluding the possibility that the existence of the bearded man in the sky himself is ever proved or disproved.

xander wrote:
TomCat39 wrote:you may try and say it's any number of things other than religion but I know without a doubt if it had not been for them giving themselves to religion, they would either be dead, in prison or other institutional situations.
...(for instance, this article seems to indicate that drug use/cessation is not significantly correlated with religious belief or church attendance, which is basically the opposite of your claim).


Uh, in the abstract it actually states "Only increase in church attendance was significantly associated with reduction in cocaine use." So the linked paper actually supports this theory, assuming that "going to church" is included under "giving oneself to religion", at least in the case of cocaine use. And at worst, there is a lack of correlation. In neither of those cases is that the opposite of the claim. A strongly negative correlation - in other words, 'religion leads to an increase in drug/alcohol use' - would be the opposite, yes; as it is, the paper merely does not support it. Going on the basis of that, I would say that religion works for some, but not for others - but in neither case is it a hindrance.

Not to mention that it is probably quite possible to find such a paper which will back up any statement one cares to utter, especially in a field not best suited to facts and figures.
User avatar
Pwnbroker
level2
level2
Posts: 183
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 10:57 am
Location: Laglandia
Contact:

Postby Pwnbroker » Mon Mar 02, 2009 9:31 am

shinygerbil wrote:So, wait, we are pushing the burden of proof around in a matter involving religion/God? :roll:

Statistical data does not denote proof, in either direction. And that is all the data we will ever receive on such matters, disregarding personal opinions, and excluding the possibility that the existence of the bearded man in the sky himself is ever proved or disproved.

xander wrote:
TomCat39 wrote:you may try and say it's any number of things other than religion but I know without a doubt if it had not been for them giving themselves to religion, they would either be dead, in prison or other institutional situations.
...(for instance, this article seems to indicate that drug use/cessation is not significantly correlated with religious belief or church attendance, which is basically the opposite of your claim).


Uh, in the abstract it actually states "Only increase in church attendance was significantly associated with reduction in cocaine use." So the linked paper actually supports this theory, assuming that "going to church" is included under "giving oneself to religion", at least in the case of cocaine use. And at worst, there is a lack of correlation. In neither of those cases is that the opposite of the claim. A strongly negative correlation - in other words, 'religion leads to an increase in drug/alcohol use' - would be the opposite, yes; as it is, the paper merely does not support it. Going on the basis of that, I would say that religion works for some, but not for others - but in neither case is it a hindrance.

Not to mention that it is probably quite possible to find such a paper which will back up any statement one cares to utter, especially in a field not best suited to facts and figures.


thus cocaine = religion

something about opiate of the masses...

Return to “Introversion Lounge”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests